Skip to main content

Full text of "The journal of Hellenic studies"

See other formats 


ΡΣ 


Nae 
ata wh 
wire vase sty 


Cnhy & 44 γα 
pee. Oiee ΣΝ Ψ 
were 


ΑἹ ᾿ 
py Oat ὴ 
Fae 


a 149: 


Vina 
een He erie 
“τ " 


ὧν τα 
ie 


tare 
Triaaeg: LateneAds 


cee’ 
ν ΨΥ part 


ne etre 
Ratare brent 4 
g20rt Tater Vee 
eg ess peat τὰ 
ΠΗ 


ee 
harces 
A tr tr 
Pah ee? 

ι 


πρό ριγν 


“9 
fe 


ἃ τέ το λιτι He #3 
seat gon τ τίει 
ἜΝ ἜΣ 


Ae says 
ve ΡΣ ΠΝ 
cor aneel 


Aya 

κὐτν hs 
DAR AR 
tor σὴς udt 


ok ats 
Ki Sagant tite ‘apt 
sh era em te 


fares 47 
ea rat cet care Tents LAMM NM TEAS 
regener bag beth ta i 
“4 


ὄέῤεησψα δὰ 
ety 


τοῦ» ΡΟΝ ἢ, ym 
shi aren coat ot 


ae. reat 
xen ἐν 
pies ὅτε ἌΡΠῸΣ ΤῊΣ 


ye ene, 


ae 

erienees μον 

Reig eee hs ὦ AT oats rit 
aetna 


se Ares ite ana 
ἩΡΉ ξ sea » 
ΡΥ 


one ttiett tt 
᾿ ot peed phe Ted tte ARES ren 
τατον: ra" ΜΗ fr AAC Φ.4 7512 eer 
of sake es ised aby sph 
2 ene ἂν 
a4 bie ἐγ πίοι ren nee Rta aP 
Sty ἢ Sy pee ΓΝ has bere 
< e 


fe pepe 


sad by 


Cee 


ΤΗΣ ieee fy ale) pif Fetes 
se os 


ON te a 
She: Beet eee 
“hte gods 
hate 


te 


Merve: eerie : 
τοῖς ΟΣ Σὰ del A tet ast 
ee sine nee 
ἱ es 4 


"5 δὰ τὰ 
κεφ φ ᾽ν & a tre hy 
Bal aay ard. σι κιοὰ 410 a 
ν᾿ ΨΥ Th Aaa bein septs ἌΡ ΘΗΝ 
φτναν δα rae 4) 
oe 


lipase ema 


A epaaay nal ty 

τι Μ: 

hak He FB baths πέσ weds 

ALLA 
ὅτε 

Wn spe aver 


abel ᾿ τ τάρε 


ange 


erat ser waver ty. 
γι 


Ne Rese froth ewer ‘paar ee 
ost weed t i 
4 > a “ἢ ae 
ταν ‘iret Wisiatire ties Ν᾽ aos pf fits "ὃς 
ΕΝ ΡΥ σ᾽ Chaps 
ee! 


whe ipsa 
“44: "Ἢν “Ὁ tate pie eceese Thee 
dete rere? 


ΝΣ 
δεν 
ΡΩΝ 
ΠΑΡ ῊΝ ped δ᾽ 
* 


δὲ Ρ ee Ae τ & τ 
Pe ad μ st se ai SAN 
᾿ 


mee 
bie 


a 


aes 
4 
reise ue 
yeni at “κα 4 vt 
atte ne 


¢ ψ 
rate 
reVinet sides 
2% ὙΦ 
ι 


τεσ κα μ᾿ 


iets 
wen 


Pe 
"δ᾿ ΟΝ Seta bet be agi 
tere e 


state 
se 


4a 
ME Ha rs are ΠΟ 
mia 


Che & 


pena: ory 
diay 


¢ 3 
brs ia pete rygred pad 
slate tah it ἜΑΡΙ ΡΩΝ war's resets 
pos ht νὸν χων ΤΣ 
Β 


sve Pour 


dan 
ΤΟ ΕΟΙΠΟΝ pits 
2% + wae 
3 τὰς 


es 


nee qa ΡΈ 
ΠΡΟΜ 


Deveney 
ἮΝ Lael ene = rein is 


farm eh 
Vee 
atts 
rugby οἶδ an 
BM 5 art ὡς 


sooo 
aha 


nA as 
aire NT cts phd 


pads τ γ μὴ ahd wee 


ἰφ ay Aree fq es 


hed aoe: at ΩΣ 
tna 
ge et 
ach? romans 
“ 
etter tres 


ΓΝ 
Saat 
Pete Aah 


een 
gt NFAY 


rae 


W's Vee 
“- Reman 
panne 
ir εν 
eet 
oe 


baad 
ἜΡΡΕΙ ΤΑΣ anes iS 
Ὁ ΤΥ reales 


ΕΜ “ἌΡΑ My 


‘ae 
A eS ἔρρει ὁ» 
ew. 


jek 


Seine 
ψν 

“ ra ἜΣ “he 
ἘΠ nie tas Ἢ 


ΞΕ 


wee eel ΟΣ tre 
pile ped 


bbe vy§ 


Ale ie νυν» 

+ birdy + ee ree. 
ve BAP Het vt | 
aot? veges hase ver 

eet τα 


we 

Pied 

ue wees 
aki οἱ na ere 


wre 


>) ταν τύοον 


treearoer " 
<> of 


εν ΤΣ ἐγ τ. τ, Sel ae 
peep) oe sar on rt ther 
Ὁ τωι. eat reat aA 
sais Sekine Aired 
᾿ ᾿ 
ΜΉΝ ΣΑΣΕΕΡΝ Ge epee 
sod heat ete we 


~ 


tim 
me anne 
¥ Ὑ ἢ 
eee eee, 


aang 

τό pir 
oH ὁ ὁ 

pene 


* 
“4,442:54 ee are 
seg. 


ἜΣ, ats ae 
» 
satiny 
ae of ΜΕ 


habe 


ΤΗΝ 
“pep hs 


lism An fo) 
Pepsi sense 
ἢ ΜΗ, 
” 
SPARE re ty 
ἢ 


yet ” 
ih pthes Ae 


ΜΗ gilts a 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
‘in 2007 with funding from 
Microsoft Corporation 


htto://www.archive.org/details/journalofhelleni23sociuoft | 


a. ee 


OF 


Ἂν» ο -s > - 


R THE PROMOTION ¢ OF HELLENIC STUDIES 


i. 


OF 


HEHELLENIC STUDIES 


VOLUME XxXIll. (1903) 


| Bie 
Sut | ho? A oY 
| } κι 
ἊΣ PUBLISHED BY THE COUNCIL, AND SOLD ON THEIR BEHALF 


BY 


a AND CO., Linrrep, ST. MARTIN'S STREET, 


| LONDON, W.C. 
Bae: ge 


RICHARD CLAY AND Sons, LIMITED, 
BREAD ΒΊΒΕΕΤ HILL, E.C., AND 
BUNGAY, SUFFOLK. 


CONTENTS. 


Rules of the Society ... 


List of Officers and Members 


Proceedings of the Society, 1901-1902 


Additions to the Library ... 


Notice to Contributors 
Dawkins (R. M.)... 
Dent (E. J.) 
Dicxrns (G.) 


Frost (K. T.) 
GarDINER (Εἰ, N.) 


” ” 


GaRDNER (Ii, A.)... 


GARDNER (P.) 
GoopsPEED (E. J.) 
Harrison (J. E.)... 
Hastuck (F. W.) 
Hirst (G. M.) 
Lorimer (H. L.) ... 
Macponatp (G.) ... 
Mackenzie (D.) ... 
Strone (E.) 
Wace (A. J. B.) ... 
Wiis (T. H.) 
Notices of Books 
Index of Subjects 
Greek Index 
List of Books Noticed 


PAGE 


ix 

xv 

XXxXvil 

liii 

lv 

Pottery from Zakro ... OE Pe Ty ae 

..- Mr. Headlam’s Theory of Greek Lyric Metre 71 
Some Points with regard to the Homeric 

House .. ; on | aah) τς eb 325 

The Statues from Cerigotto [Plates VIII, 1X) 217 

The Method of Deciding the Pentathlon 54 

Notes on the Greek Foot Race tev hows 201 
The Bronze Statue from Cenigayi Sea 

VIII, TX.] Ri hak 152 

. Two Heads of Apollo [Plate 111.] ... 117 

Alexandrian Hexameter Fragments [Plate X.] 291 

Mystica Vannus Iacchi 292 

Inscriptions from Cyzicus 75 

The Cults of Olbia (Part II.) ... 24 

The Country Cart of Ancient Greece 132 

Early Seleucid Portraits [Plates I., II.] 92 

The Pottery of Knossos [Plates IV.-VII.] ... 157 

Three Sculptured Stelai [Plates XI.-XIII.] ... 356 

Recent Excavations in Asia Minor... 335 

Theognis and his Poems ... 2. 

206, 360 

369 

374 

3 816 


-ἰ 


LIST OF PLATES. 


ἘΠ eele Seleucid: Poviearta: ἧι 
ILI. ‘The Oldfield Head of Apollo. ᾷ 
IV. Neolithic Ware from Knossos. ΑἹ 

V. Minoan Cups from Knossos, 

' ΥἹ,, VII. Minoan Pottery from Knossos. 
᾿ς VIII. Head of Bronze fiom Cerigotto. 
IX. Bronze Statue from Cerigotto. :ῷ 
"ὦ Alexandrian Hexameter Fragment. © | 
XI. Stele of Melisto and Epigenes. 

XII. Stele of Arkesis. . 
XIII. Stele of an Actor. ries πο  - 


CONTENTS. vii 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT. 


Bronze Coins of Olbia in the British Museum ey ἥν eee a 33, 34 
ἧς att. she » Berlin Museum πο  ἰχχωαυ bat 42,51 
RN PORTER hoon cast casi Tiexd Adobe fan: sp 4 aver’ aesieisas,| ape 08 
Relief of Timolaus and Piasiios from Ovsions ΡΣ Eng PT Oa Oe ὃ ΤῈ 
»  Asclepias As “4 Te ee er Tn A ee eee > | 

» Aur. Apollodorus ? ys Le ci ih we ΩΣ ΠῚ ΜῊ .. Om 
SONU MMORPEROMN COVEIOUS 65. onc os ρος το depp eve, Sew eas ees 88 
πον ὐραῖδη RAGRT OF ΡΟ... ... ce cee ee Ὁ cen ep two ecg ee 118 
ENED STOUT sca τς ned gas!) sg gem ρει oem i aun, 119 
Head from the Mausoleum pcan eae coe hw Ed ead | oaks SNe shin, τ ΤῊ e 
PME, WEGIIMINOUNMOT myn cys. τεύξει ἄρον τοινρ Senn + “ade awd! Wen ὁ ἄς 190 
ΒΟ Β ΟΓ ΑΝ Β. ἔργ DODD Te ei. nie tenes) sug) con, see wow won, vse) 139 
πε σοΝ οΡοΐ σα Soci ποτε chen ake cee. see See ὧν ve as, 129 
Pyxis at Athens (Wedding Seenes) .. = He retake. 8 fark = Babe Πρ ΣΦ 
Relief in Villa Albani (Silenus and Priasieo on ear). ee ee ae 198 
Scene from ἃ Cabeiric Vase (Wedding Protessidn)... ... ... 6... «2 «. 137 
= 7 a ee CAP UDI O πο ον Sita are, aes, ine foe. τς 198 
Corinthian Pinax at Berlin (Chariot) :.. ... ... 0. cee cee vee eee 189 
From a Chalcidian Vase in Brit. Mus. (Farm cart) VOI SOK,” SR, MEL, (nck eee 
Terracotta from Cyprus at.Athens (Country-cart)... ... 0... 0 we wee 140 
From R.F. Amphora at Munich (Travelling-cart) ... 142 
Wooden Wheels from Mercurago .., 146 
Pottery of Knossos... ... 167, 175- 178, 180, 186, 189, 191- 198, 195- 198, 204 


Polycleitan Statuette from Cerigotto 22 
Statuette of Hermes a Pa 26 
Marble Figure és - 31 
Portrait of a Philosopher ,, te AV ines COKE tinh Blk δ᾿ ἰς τῷ πως Age 9298 
Pottery from Zakro ... ... : tee} Sabo ee na 94... ὡ259 


=I 
φΦ 


Greek Foot Race: R.F. ‘Mics; in the Doni 
” ” »,  R.F. Kylix formerly at Naples... 
» "» »  Pelike belonging to Dr. Hauser 
ss » ΠΝ Kylix, Munich ... : 
᾽» 3 " Ἢ » in ΒΙΜΡΎΒ 6)... 
” ” ” ” ” Berlin 
> δι »  Euphronius Kylix, Paris ... 
” γ᾽ »  R.F. Kylix, formerly at Berlin... 
Ἢ 9 » Reconstruction of the Armed Race ... 
» +» 9 Bourguignon Skyphos... 
” ” ” R.F. Kylix, Munich ... 

9%, ” ” ” % in B.M. (E 818) 


“1-1 
bo τὸ μα 


ι τ ἡ -ὦ 
ΦΦ ὦ Ο “2 w 


bo bo bo τὸ τῷ τῷ τὸ bo po bo bo τῷ bo τῷ τὸ bt bo 


oO 
οι 


viii 7 CONTENTS. 


Greek Foot Race: R.F. Kylix, in B.M. (E 78) 
Cambridge 

τ rf :; a » in BM, (E 22) 
Hermes in the Liknon (R.F. Kylix)... 
Coins of Nicaea and Hadriani in the B.M. 
Child in Liknon (Terracotta plaque in B.M.) .. 

” » (Pashley Sarcophagus) εἶν 
Liknon with First fruits (Relief in Louvre) 

» erected (Relief in Munich) 
Modern Winnowing ‘ Fan’ from France .... 
Winnowing ‘ Fan’ in use ... 


3) 7 ” ” ᾽ν 


Cretan θυρνάκι ἘΣ τον ἘρῸτ ales 
Winnowing Implements in use in Finland 
Brass of Sir Robert de Setvans (Chartham) 


The Liknon in use in Eleusinian Mysteries (Urn at Rome) ... 
Carrying of Likna at Marriage Procession (B.F. Vase in B.M., B 174) 


Liknon and Dionysiac Mask (Verona) 
Disk in Fitzwilliam Museum ae 
Stucco Relief (Museo delle Terme) ... 
- Blue glass amphora (Florence) ... 
Plan of the Homeric House 
The Palace at Tiryns ... 
Plans of Houses at Cnossus 

Pa pe », Phylakopi ... 

Ἢ Palace at Mycenae 
Pergamum: Plan of Excavations 


4 Entrance to Second Gymnasium Terrace ... 


Ephesus : Plan ... Nii 7 tek ¢ ὃν 
7 Restoration of Hellenistic Gate 
Bo ῶ Roman Entrance τὰς 
- Plan of Western End of eater a Wall ἊΝ 
= Restoration of Round Monument - 
Ὁ Bronze athlete ... 
MA Bronze lampstand 
"ἢ Marble female head ... 
ks Male portrait head as Hermes... 


Ἂν Boy with duck . : sie 

δ Head of goddess with Sindleds ἊΣ 

. Portrait bust of priest ᾿ 

i. Panels of frieze of Hunting βρῶ 

fs Amazon relief .. «.. we. ‘see 
Miletus: Plan : 

» West End of ὀρῶν Building ’ 

ἡ Southern Gate 


349, 


RULES 


OF THE 


Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies. 


1. THE objects of this Society shall be as follows :— 


I. To advance the study of Greek language, literature, and art, and 
to illustrate the history of the Greek race in the ancient, Byzantine, 
and Neo-Hellenic periods, by the publication of memoirs and unedited 
documents or monuments in a Journal to be issued periodically. 


II. To collect drawings, facsimiles, transcripts, plans, and photographs 
of Greek inscriptions, MSS., works of art, ancient sites and remains, and 
with this view to invite travellers to communicate to the Society notes 
or sketches of archeological and topographical interest. 


» III. To organise means by which members of the Society may have 
increased facilities for visiting ancient sites and pursuing archzologica] 
researches in countries which, at any time, have been the sites of Hellenic 
civilization. 


2. The Society shall consist of a President, Vice-Presidents, a Council, 
a Treasurer, one or more Secretaries, and Ordinary Members. All officers 
of the Society shall be chosen from among its Members, and shall be 
ex officio members of the Council. 


3. The President shall preside at all General, Ordinary, or Special 
Meetings of the Society, and of the Council or of any Committee at 
which he is present. In case of the absence of the President, one of 
the Vice-Presidents shall preside in his stead, and in the absence of 
the Vice-Presidents the Treasurer. In the absence of the Treasurer 


the Council or Committee shall appoint one of their Members to preside. 
b 
> 


Χ 


4. The funds and other property of the Society shall be administered 
and applied by the Council in such manner as they shall consider most 
conducive to the objects of the Society: in the Council shall also be 
vested the control of all publications issued by the Society, and the 
general management of all its affairs and concerns. The number of the 
Council shall not exceed fifty. 


5. The Treasurer shall receive, on account of the Society, all 
subscriptions, donations, or other moneys accruing to the funds thereof, 
and shall make all payments ordered by the Council. All cheques shall 
be signed by the Treasurer and countersigned by the Secretary. 


6. In the absence of the Treasurer the Council may direct that 
cheques may be signed by two members of Council and countersigned 
by the Secretary. 


7. The Council shall meet as often as they may deem necessary for 
the despatch of business. 


8. Due notice of every such Meeting shall be sent. to each Member 
of the Council, by a summons signed by the Secretary. 


9. Three Members of the Council, provided not more than one of 
the three present be a permanent officer of the Society, shall be a 
quorum. 


10. All questions before the Council shall be determined by a 
majority of votes. The Chairman to have a casting vote. 


11. The Council shall prepare an Annual Report, to be submitted 
to the Annual Meeting of the Society. 


12. The Secretary shall give notice in writing to each Member of 
the Council of the ordinary days of meeting of the Council, and shall 
have authority to summon a Special and Extraordinary Meeting of the 
Council on a requisition signed by at least four Members of the Council. 


13. Two Auditors, not being Members of the Council, shall be 
elected by the Society in each year. 


14. A General Meeting of the Society shall be held in London in 
June of each year, when the Reports of the Council and of the Auditors 
shall be read, the Council, Officers, and Auditors for the ensuing year 
‘elected, and any other business recommended by the Council discussed 


a: 3 5 “The President, Vice-Presidents, Treasurer, Secretaries, and 
sf Council shall be elected by the se aaa of the Society at the Annual 
Meeting. 
Tr ! 


: 16. The President and Vice-Presidents shall be appointed for one 
_ year, after which they shall be eligible for re-election at the Annual 
Meeting. 


17. One-third of the Council shall retire every year, but the Members 
so retiring shall be eligible for re-election at the Annual Meeting. 


18. The Treasurer and Secretaries shall hold their offices during the 
pleasure of the Council. 


. 19. The elections of the Officers, Council, and Auditors, at the 

Annual Meeting, shall be by a majority of the votes of those present. 
The Chairman of the Meeting shall have a casting vote. The mode in 
which the vote shall be taken shall be determined by the President 
and Council. 


20. Every Member of the Society shall be summoned to the Annual 
_ - Meeting by notice issued at least one month before it is held. 


21. All motions made at the Annual Meeting shall be in writing 
and shall be signed by the mover and seconder. No motion shall be 
submitted, unless notice of it has been given to the Secretary at least 
Ὶ three weeks before the Annual Meeting. 


22. Upon any vacancy in the Presidency, occurring between the 
Annual Elections, one of the Vice-Presidents shall be elected by the 
Council to priate as President until the next Annual lags 


: a Sieh "28. All vacancies among the other Officers of the Society occurring 
ἐν between the same dates shall in like manner be provisionally filled up 
Ἐ the Council until the next Annual Meeting. 


ΠῚ The names of all candidates wishing to become Members of the 
sha be submitted to a Meeting of the Council, and at their 
stir a Council ube urorees to the election of candidates 


ΧΙ 
25. The Annual Subscription of Members shall beone guinea, payable 
and due on the Ist of January each year ; this annual subscription may be 
compounded for by a payment of £15 15s., entitling compounders to be 
Members of the Society for life, without further payment. All Members 


elected on or after January 1, 1894, shall pay on election an entrance fee 
of one guinea. 


26. The payment of the Annual Subscription, or of the Life 
Composition, entitles each Member to receive a copy of the one 
publications of the Society. 


27. When any Member of the Society shall be six months in arrear 
of his Annual Subscription, the Secretary or Treasurer shall remind him 
of the arrears due, and in case of non-payment thereof within six months 
after date of such notice, such defaulting Member shall cease to be a 
Member of the Society, unless the Council make an order to the contrary. 


28. Members intending to leave the Society must send a formal 
notice of resignation to the Secretary on or before January I ; otherwise 
they will be held liable for the subscription for the current year. 


29. If at any time there may appear cause for the expulsion of a 
Member of the Society, a Special Meeting of the Council shall be held 
to consider the case, and if at such Meeting at least two-thirds of the 
Members present shall concur in a resolution for the expulsion of such 
Member of the Society, the President shall submit the same for con- 
firmation at a General Meeting of the Society specially summoned for 
this purpose, and if the decision of the Council be confirmed by a 
majority at the General Meeting, notice shall be given to that effect to 
the Member in question, who shall thereupon cease to be a Member of 
the Society. 


30. The Council shall have power to nominate British or Foreign 
Honorary Members. The number of British Honorary Members shall 
not exceed ten. 


31. Ladies shall be eligible as Ordinary Members of the Society, and 
when elected shall be entitled to the same privileges as other Ordinary 
Members. 


32. No change shall be made in the Rules of the Society unless 
at least a fortnight before the Annual Meeting specific notice be given 
to every Member of the Society of the changes proposed. 


Μ᾿; ἦν͵ ae 's -- ᾿ ἌὍμ, 


RULES FOR THE USE OF THE LIBRARY 
AT 22 ALBEMARLE STREET. 


-I. TuHat the Library be administered by the Library Committce, 
which shall be composed of not less than four members, two of whom shall 
form a quorum. 


II. That the custody and arrangement of the Library be in the hands 
of the Hon. Librarian and Librarian, subject to the control of the 
Committee, and in accordance with Regulations drawn up by the said 
Committee and approved by the Council. 


IIL. That all books, periodicals, plans, photographs, &c., be received 
by the Hon. Librarian, Librarian or Secretary and reported to the 
Council at their next meeting. 


IV. That every book or periodical sent to the Society be at once 
stamped with the Society’s name. 


V. That all the Society’s books be entered in a Catalogue to be kept 
by the Librarian, and that in this Catalogue such books, &c., as are not to 
be lent out be specified. 


VI. That, except on Christmas Day, Good Friday, and on Bank 
Holidays, the Library be accessible to Members on all week days from 
eleven A.M. to six P.M. (Saturdays, II A.M. to 2 P.M.), when either the 
Librarian, or in his absencé some responsible person, shall be in 
attendance. Until further notice, however, the Library shall be closed for 
the vacation from July 20 to August 31 (inclusive). 


ΜΠ: That the Society’s books (with exceptions hereinafter to be 
specified) be lent to Members under the following conditions :— 


(1) That the number of volumes lent at any one time to each 
Member shall not exceed three. 


(2) That the time during which such book or books may be kept 
shall not exceed one month. 


. (3) That no books be sent beyond the limits of the United Kingdom. 
VIII. That the manner in which books are lent shall be as follows :— 


(1) That all requests for the loan of books be addressed to the 
Librarian. 


(2) That the Librarian shall record all such requests, and lend out 
the books in the order of application. 


(3) That in each case the name of the book and of the borrower be- 
inscribed, with the date, in a special register to be kept by 
the Eiratian:. 


Should a book not be returned within the period specified, the: 
’ Librarian may reclaim it. 


τὸ ῥῥυ 
΄ 


XIV 


(5) All expenses of carriage to and fro shall be borne by the 
borrower. 


(6) All books are due for return to the Library before the summer 
vacation. 
IX. That no book falling under the following categories be lent out 
under any circumstances :— 
(1) Unbound books. 
(2) Detached plates, plans, photographs, and the like. 
(3) Books considered too valuable for transmission. 
(4) New books within one month of their coming into the 
Library. 
X. That new books may be borrowed for one week only, if they have 
been more than one month and less than three months in the Library. 


XI. That in the case of a book being kept beyond the stated time the 
borrower be liable to a fine of one shilling for each week after application 
has been made by the Librarian for its return,and if a book is lost the 
borrower be bound to replace it. 


_ The Library Committee. 
MR. J. ὁ: C. ANDERSON. 
PROF. W. C. F. ANDERSON. 
Mr. TALFOURD ELy. 
PROF. ERNEST A. GARDNER. 
ΜΕ. F. G. KENYON, D.Litt. 
ΜΕ. GEORGE MACMILLAN, D.Litt. (Hon. Sec.) 
Mr. J. L. MyREs (/on. Keeper of Photographic Collections), 
Mr. ARTHUR HAMILTON SMITH (fon. Librarian), 
Mrs. S. ARTHUR STRONG, LL.D. 
Applications for books and letters relating to the Photographie 
Collections, and Lantern Slides, should be addressed to the Librarian 
(Mr. J. ff. Baker-Penoyre), at 22 Albemarle Street, W. 


SESSION 1903—1904. 

General Meetings will be held in the Rooms of*the Society of 
Antiquaries, Burlington House, London, W., for the reading of Papers 
and for Discussion, at 5 P.M. on the following days :— 

1903. 
Tuesday, November 3rd. 
Tuesday, November 24th. 
1904. . 
Tuesday, February 23rd. 
Tuesday, May 3rd. 
Tuesday, june 28th-(Annual). 


- The Council will meet at 4.30 p.m. on each of the above days. ? 


THE SOCIETY FOR THE PROMOTION OF HELLENIG} STUDIES, 
OFFICERS AND COUNCIL FOR 1903—1904. 


President, 
SIR RICHARD JEBB, Litt.D., D.C.L., LL.D. M.P. 


Vice-Presidents. 


PROF. 5. H. BUTCHER, Lirt.D., LL.D., D.Lirr. 
PROF. INGRAM BYWATER, Litt.D., LL.D. 
REV. PROF. LEWIS CAMPBELL, LL.D. 

MR, SIDNEY COLVIN. 

ΜΕ: ARTHUR J. EVANS, F.R.S., D.Lirr., LL.D. 
PROF. ERNEST GARDNER. 

PROF. PERCY GARDNER, Lirt.D. 

MR. WALTER LEAF, Lirt.D. 

MR. Ὁ. B. MONRO, Lirt.D., LL. D., Provost of Oriel | i 


College. Oxford. 


MR. A. S. MURRAY, LL.D. 

PROF. H. F. PELHAM, LL.D., President of Trinity 
College, Oxford. 

PROF. W. M. RAMSAY, D.C.L., LL.D., Lirr.D. 

ΜΕ. J. E. SANDYS, Lirt.D. 


' REV. PROF. A. H. SAYCE, LL.D. 


SIR E. MAUNDE THOMPSOW, K.C.B., D.C.L.», 
LL.D. 

PROF. R. ¥Y. TYRRELL, Litt.D., D.C.L., LL.D. 

MR. CHARLES WALDSTEIN, Lirt.D. 


Council. 


PROF. W.C F. ANDERSON. 

REV. A. G. BATHER. 

MR, R. CARR BOSANQUET. 

PROF. J. B. BURY, LL.D., Litt.D., D.Litt. 
MR. H. G. DAKYNS. 

MR. LOUIS DYER. 

MR.TALFOURD ELY. 

LADY EVANS. 

REV. JAMES GOW, Lirtr.D. 

MR. B. P. GRENFELL, Lirt.D., D.Lirvr. 
MISS JANE HARRISON, LL.D., D.Lirr. 
MR. 6. F. HILL. 

MR. Ὁ. 5. HOGARTH. 

MR. A. S. HUNT, D.Lirr. 

MR. F. 6. KENYON, D.Lirr. 

MR. WILLIAM LORING. 


MR. GEORGE MACDONALD. 
MR, G. E. MARINDIN. 

MR. R. J. 6. MAYOR. 

MR. ERNEST MYERS. 

MR. J. L. MYRES. 

MISS EMILY PENROSE. 

REV. G. C. RICHARDS. 

PROF. WILLIAM RIDGEWAY. 

MR. E. E. SIKES. 

MR.A. HAMILTON SMITH. 

MR. CECIL SMITH, LL.D. 

MRS. S. ARTHUR STRONG, LL.D. 
MR. F. E. THOMPSON. 

MR. H. B. WALTERS. 

PROF. A. 5. WILKINS, LL.D., Lirr.D. 


. Hon. Treasurer. 
MR. DOUGLAS W. FRESHFIELD. 


Hon. Secretary. 
MR. GEORGE A. MACMILLAN, D.Lirt., ST. MARTIN’S STREET, W.C, 
Hon. Librarian. 
MR. ARTHUR H. SMITH. 
Hon. Keeper of Photographic Collections. 
MR. J. L. MYRES. 
Librarian and Keeper of Photographic Collections. 
MR. J. ff. BAKER-PENOYRE. 
Assistant Treasurer. 
MR. GEORGE GARNETT. 
Assistant Secretary. 
MR. S. J. LUDBROOK. 
Acting Editorial Committee. 


PROF. ERNEST GARDNER, | 


MR. G. F. HILL. 


| MR. F. G. KENYON. 


Consultative Editorial Committee. 
SIR RICHARD JEBB | PROFESSOR BYWATER | SIR E.MAUNDE THOMPSON | MR.SIDNEY COLVIN 
PROFESSOR PERCY GARDNER, and MR. R. CARR BOSANQUET (ex officio) as 
Director of the British School at Athens. 


Auditors for 1903-1904. 


MR, ARTHUR J. BUTLER. | 


MR. GEORGE LILLIE CRAIK. 


_ Bankers. 


MESSRS. ROBARTS, LUBBOCK & CO., 15 LOMBARD STREET. 


CAMBRIDGE BRANCH 


OF . . 
THE SOCIETY FOR THE “PROMOTION: 
OF -HELLENIC. SiG O1es, I 
fr 
. OFFICERS AND COMMITEEE FOR 1903-1904. j 
Chairman. 
Sir. RICHARD Jess, Litr.D., D.C.L., LL.D., M.P. 
Vice-Chairman. 
Mr. J. E. Sanpys, LittT.D. δὼ 
ΝΥ 
Committee. 
Mr. J. G. Frazer, LL.D.’ Mr. E. E. SIKEs. ; 
ProF. ERNEST A. GARDNER. Mr. ARTHUR TILLEY. 
Mr. Henry Jackson, Litt.D. ἢ Mr. A. W. VERRALL, Litt.D. , ᾿ 
Pror. W. RipGEway. Mr. C. WatpsTEIN, Litt.D, ἢ _ 


Hon. Secretary. 


Mr. ARTHUR BERNARD COOK, TRINITY COLLEGE. 


3 


xvii 


- 


HONORARY MEMBERS. 


HIS MAJESTY THE KING OF THE HELLENES, ἃ M. le Secrétaire du Roi de 
- Hellenes, Athens. 

Hofrath Dr. Friedrich August Otto Benndorf, K. Α΄. Osterr. Archaeologisches Institut, 
Vienna. | 

Sir Alfred Biliotti, K.C.B. 

Prof. Friedrich Blass, The University, Halle, Germany. 

Prof. Ὁ. Comparetti, /stituto di Studii Superiori, Florence. 

M. Alexander Contostavlos, Ashens. 

Prof. A. Conze, Kaiser’. Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut, Cornelius-str., 2, 11. 
Berlin. 

Prof. Wilhelm Dérpfeld, Ph.D, D.C.L., Kazser/. Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut, 
Athens. 

Monsieur L’Abbé Duchesne, Ecole Francaise, Rome. 

Monsieur P. Foucart, 13, Rue de Tournon, Paris. 

Prof. Adolf Furtwingler, Zhe University, Munich. 

Monsieur J. Gennadius, D.C.L., 14, de Vere Gardens, Kensington. 

Prof. Federico Halbherr, Via Arenula, 21, Rome. 

His Excellency Hamdy Bey, Keefer of the Museum of Antiquities, Constantinople. 

Monsieur Joseph Hazzidaki, Keeper of the National Museum, Candia, Crete. 

Prof. W. Helbig, Vil/a Lante, Kome. 

Monsieur Homolle, Ecole Francaise, Athens. 

Monsieur P. Kavvadias, Ephor-General of Antiquities, Athens. 

Prof. A. Kirchhoff, Ze University, Berlin. 

Prof. U. Kohler, Zhe University, Berlin. 

Prof. A. Michaelis, Zhe University, Strassburg. 

Prof. E. Petersen, /mstituto Archeologico Germanico, Monte Tarpeo, Rome. 

Prof. Rufus B. Richardson, 716 American School of Classical Studies, Athens. 

Prof. Ulrich v. Wilamowitz-MOllendorff, The University, Berlin. 

Prof. Adolf Wilhelm, Α΄. A. Osterr. Archaeologisches Institut, Athens, Greece. 


LIST OF MEMBERS. 


* Original Members. + Life Members. t Life Members, Honoris Causa. 
The other Members have been elected by the Council since the Inaugural Meeting. 


tAbbot, Edwin H., 1, Fol/en Street, Cambridge, Mass., U.S.A. 
Abbott, ἃ. F., 15, Emmanuel Road, Cambridge. 
tAbercrombie, Dr. John, 23, Upper Wimpole Street, W. 
Adam, James, Litt.D., Zmmanuel College, Cambridge. 
Adams, Miss Mary G., 43, Campden Hill Square, Kensington, W. 
Ainger, A. C., Eton College, Windsor. 
Ainger, Rev. Canon, Masters House, The Temple, E.C. 
tAinslie, R. St. John, 3, Haldon Terrace, Dawlish, South Devon. 
Alford, Rev. B. H., 51, Gloucester Gardens, W. 
Allbutt, Professor T. Clifford, M.D., F,R.S., Chaucer Road, ee. 
Allcroft, A. Hadrian, 15, Chepstow Villas, W. 
Allen, J. B., c/o Bank of Montreal, 22, Abchurch Lane, E.C. 
Allen, T. W., Queen’s College, Oxford. 
Amherst, Lord, Didlington Hall, Brandon, Suffolk. 
tAnderson, J. G. C., Christ Church, Oxford. 
Anderson, J. R., Lairbeck, Keswick. 
Anderson, Prof. W. Ὁ. F. (Council), University College, Sheffield. 
Anderson, Yarborough, 40, Pa// Mail, .S.W. 
Anderton, Basil, Pud/ic Library, Newcastle-on-Tyne. 
_ Andrews, Prof. Newton Lloyd, Colgate University, Hamilton, N.Y., U.S.A. 
Anstruther, Miss, 13, Che/sea Gardens, Chelsea, S. VW’. 


xviii 


Archer-Hind, R, D., 7vinity College, Cambridge. 
tArkwright, W., Adbury House, Newbury. 

Asquith, Raymond, 4// Souls’ College, Oxford. 

Asquith, W. W., Clifton College, Bristol. 

Avebury, The Right Hon, Lord, High Elms, Huyes, Kent. 

Awdry, Herbert, Wellington College, Berks. 

Bailey, Cyril, Balliol College, Oxford. 

Bailey, J. C., 20, Egerton Gardens, S.W. 

Baker, Η. T., MWew College, Oxford. 

Baker-Penoyre, J. ff. (Librarian), Leighton Hlouse, Holland Park Road, W. 
*Balfour, Right Hon. A. J., M.P., το, Downing Street, S.W. 
*Balfour, Right Hon. G. W., M.P., Board of Trade, Whitehall, S.W. 

Ball, Sidney, St. John’s College, Oxford. 

Baring, Hon. Cecil, c/o Messrs. Coutts and Co., 59, Strand, W.C. 
+Barlow, Miss Annie E. F., Greenthorne, Edgworth, Bolton. 

Barlow, Lady, 10, Wimpole Street, W. 

Barnsley, Sidney H., Pinbury, near Cirencester. 

Barran, J. N., Weetwood, Leeds. 

Bather, Rev. Arthur George (Council), 8, Aimgsgate Street, Winchester. 

Bayfield, Rev. M. A., Park Grange, Edgbaston, Birmingham 

Beare, Prof. John I., 9, 77¢nzty College, Dublin. 
+Beaumont, Somerset, Shere, near Guildford. 

Bell, Miss Gertrude, 95, Sloane Street, S.W. 

Bell, Rev. G. C. 

Benjamin, A. F., 24, Norfolk Square, W. 
tBenn, Alfred W., // Ciliegio, San Gervasio, Florence. 

Bennett, S. A., Hill House, Eweline, Wallingford. 

Benson, Prank Sherman, 214, ἘΣΘ Heights, Columbia, Brooklyn, N. Y,, U.S.A. 

Bent, Mrs. Theodore, 13, Great Cumberland Place, W. 
tBernays, A. E,, 3, Brae Road, Kew, Surrey. 

Berridge, Miss Edith, Dunton Lodge, The Knoll, Beckenham. 

Bevan, E. R., Banwell Abbey, Somerset. 

Bickford-Smith, R. A. H., 29, Ladbroke Grove, W. 

Bienkowski, Prof, von P., Basztowa, 5, Krakau. 
tBikelas, Demetrius, Athens, Greece. 

Billson, Charles J., Zhe Wayside, Oadby, Leicester. 

Bishop, Major Tuke, 3, Zokenhouse Buildings, King’s Arms Yard, E C. 
tBissing, Dr. von, Leopoldstrasse, 54, Munchen. 

Blackledge, Miss Katherine, 21, Gambier Terrace, Liverpool. 

Blunt, A. W. F., Exeter College, Oxford. 

Bodington, Prof. N., Principal of the Yorkshire College, Leeds. 

Bond, Edward, M. P., E/m Bank, Hampstead, N.W. 

Bosanquet, Rev. F. C. T., Zhe Hermitage, Uplyme, Devon. 

Bosanquet, R. Carr (Council), British School of Archeology, Athens. 

Bousfield, William, 20, Hyde Park Gate, S.W. 

Boyd, Rev. Henry, D.D., Principal of Hertford College, fam 

Boys, Rev. H. A., Worth ‘Cadbury Rectory, Bath. 

Bramley, Rev. H. R., Zhe Precentory, Lincoln. 

Bramwell, Miss, 73, Chester Square, S.W. 

Branteghem, A. van, 8, Rue du Buisson, Brussels. 

Brinton, Hubert, Z7on College, Windsor. 

Briscoe, Miss, Weach Hill, Shifnal. 

Broadbent, H., Eton College, Windsor. 

Brooke, Rev. A. E., King’s College, Cambridge. 

Brooke, Rev. Stopford A., 1, Manchester Square, W. 

Brooks, E. W., 28, Great Ormond Street, W.C. 

Brooksbank, Mrs., Leigh Place, Godstone. 

Brown, A C. B., New College, Oxford. 


XIX 


~ 
- - 


Brown, Horace T., F.R.S., 52, Wevern Square, South Kensington, S.W. 
Brown, Horatio F., c/o Messrs. Mackenzie & Black, 28, Castle St., Edinburgh. 
Brown, James, Netherby, Galashiels, N.B. 
Brown, Prof. G. Baldwin, 716 University, Edinburgh. 
Brown, S. R., Epsom College, Surrey. 
*Bryce, The Right Hon. James, D.C.L., Litt.D., M.P., 54, Portland Place, W. 
Bull, Rev. Herbert, Wedlington House, Westgate-on-Sea. 
Buls, M. Ch., 40, Rue du Beau-Site, Bruxelles. 
Bulwer, Sir Henry, K.C.M.G., 17, South Audley Street, W. 
Burge, Rev, Hubert M., Zhe College, Winchester. 
Burgh, W. G. de, University College, Reading. 
+Burnaby, R. B., Zrinity College, Glenalmond, Perth. 
Burnet, Prof. J., 1, Alexandra Place, St. Andrews, N.B. 
Burrows, Prof. Ronald, University College, Cardiff: 
Bury, Prof. J. B., LL.D. Litt.D., D.Litt. (Council), A7zmg’s College, Cambridge. 
Butcher, Prof. S. H., Litt.D., LL.D., D.Litt. (V.P.), 6, Tavistock Square, W.C. 
Butler, Arthur J., Wood End, Weybridge. 
Butler, H. E., Mew College, Oxford. 
*Butler, The Rev. H. M., D.D., Master of Trinity College, Cambridge. 
Buxton, F. W., 42, Grosvenor Gardens, S.W. 
Buxton, Mrs. Alfred W., 32, Great Cumberland Place, W. 
Buxton, Miss Victoria A., Warlies, Waltham Abbey. 
Bywater, Prof. Ingram, Litt.D., D. Litt. (V.P.), 93, Onslow Square, S.W. 
tBywater, Mrs., 93, Onslow Square, S.W. 
Callander, T., Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada. 
tCalvocoressi, L. M., Messrs. Ralli Bros., Mellor’s Bdgs., Exchange St. East, Lives pool. 
Ε, Campbell, Rev. Prof. Lewis, LL.D. (V.P.), 33, Campden House Chambers, W. 
| Campbell, Mrs. Lewis, 33, Campden House Chambers, W. 
Capes, Rev. Canon W. W., Addington, near West Malling. 
Carapdnos, Constantin, Député, Achens. 
Carey, Miss, c/o T. Brooksbank, Esq., Belford Lodge, St. John’s Road East, Putney, S.W. 
*Carlisle, A. D., Hatleybury College, Hertford. 
Carlisle, Miss Helen,. Houndhill, Marchington, Stafford. 
+Carmichael, Sir T. D. Gibson, Castlecraig, Dolphinton, N.B. 
Carnford, F. M., 7rinity College, Cambridge. 
tCarr, Rev. A., Addington Vicarage, Croydon. 
Carr, H. Wildon, 25, Cumberland Terrace, Regent’s.Park, N.W. 
Carter, Prof. Frank, McGill University, Montreal. 
Carter, Reginald, Rector of Edinburgh Academy, Edinburgh. 
+Carthew, Miss, 15a, Kensington Palace Gardens, W. 
Cartwright, T. B., 
Case, Miss Janet, 5, Windmill Hill, Hampstead, N.W. 
Caton, Richard, Holly Lea, Livingstone Drive South, Liverpool. 
Chambers, C. Gore, Hertford House, de Parys Avenue, Bedford. 
Chambers, Charles D., St. John’s College, Battersea, S.W. 
Chambers, Edmund Kirchener, 9, Lansdowne Crescent, W. 
Chance, Frederick, Mew University Club, St. James's Street, S.W. 
Chapman, Rev. James, Southlands, Battersea, S.W. 
Chavasse, A. S., Ldgebarrow Lodge, Wellington College, Crowthorne, Berks. 
tChawner, G., King’s College, Cambridge. 
t+Chawner, W., Master of Emmanuel College, Cambridge. 
Cheetham, J. Frederick, Eastwood, Staleybridge. 
Christian, J. Henry, 18, Devonshire Place, Portland Place, W. 
Christian. Rev. G., Redgate, Uppingham. 
Christie, John, Henleigh, Kingston Hill. 
Christie, A. H., Zhe Bungalow, Ewell, Surrey. 
τς Christie-Miller, 5. R., 21, St. James's Place, W. 
<A Churchill E. L., Eton College, Windsor. 


ΧΧ 


Clark, Charles R. R., 20, Cowley Street, Westminster, S.W. 
Clark, J. W., Scroope House, Cambridge. 
+Clark-Maxwell, Rev. W. Gilchrist, C/lunbury Vicarage, Ashton-on-Clem, Salop. 
Clarke, Somers, 48, Albert Court, Kensington Gore, S.W. 
+Clauson, A. C., 12, Park Place Villas, Paddington, W. 
Clay, Ὁ. F., 51, Tavistock Square, W.C. 
Clay, C. J., West House, Cambridge. 
Clerke, Miss Agnes, 68, Redcliffe Square, S.W. 
Clulow, G., 51, Belsize Avenue, Hampstead, N.W. 
Cobbold, Felix T., The Lodge, Felixstowe, Suffolk.. 
*Cobham, C. Delaval, C.47.G., H.B.M. Commissioner, Larnaca, Cyprus. 
Cockerell, S. Pepys, 35, PAi//imore Gardens, Kensington, W. 
Cole, A. C., 64, Portland Place, W. 
Colfox, William, Westmead, Bridport. , 
Collins, Miss F. H., 3, Bramham Gardens, South Kensington, S.W. 
Colvin, Sidney (V.P.), British Museum, W.C. 
Compton, Rev. W. C., Zhe College, Dover. 
Connal, B. M., The Yorkshire College, Leeds. 
Conway, Sir W. M., Zhe Aed House, 21, Hornton Street, W. 
Conybeare, F. C., 13, Norham Gardens, Oxford. 
Cook, Arthur Bernard, Queen’s College, Cambs idge. 
Cook, E. T., 61, Russell Sguare, W.C. ; 
Cooke, Rev. A. H., Aldenham School, Elstree, Herts. 
Cooke, Richard, Zhe Croft, Detling, Maidstone. 
Cookson, C., Magdalen College, Oxford. 
Cookson, Sir C. A., K.C.M.G., 96, Cheyne Walk, .5. 17’. 
Corbet, His Honour Eustace K., Native Court of Appeal, Cairo. 
Cordery, J. G., C.S.1., 63, Goldington Road, Bedford. 
Corgialegno, M., 53, Mount Street, Berkeley Square, W. 
‘Courtenay, Miss, 34, Brompton Square, S.W. 
Courtney, W. L., 53, Belsize Park, N.W. 
Cowper, The Right Hon. Earl, K.G., Panshanger, Hertford. 
Cowper, H. Swainson, Yew Freld, Hawkshead, Lancashire. 
Crace, J. F., 15, Gloucester Place, W. 
Craik, George Lillie, 2, West Halkin Street, S.W. 
Crewdson, Wilson. 
Crommelin, Miss Constance de la Cherois, 57, Hyde Park Mansions, Marylebone Rd., W. 
Cronin, Rev. H. S., Zrinity Hall, Cambridge. 
Crooke, W., Langton House, Charlton Kings, Cheltenham. 
Crossman, C. Stafford, 67, Porchester Terrace, W. 
Crowfoot, J. W., Zuzf Club, Cairo, 
Cunliffe, R. J., 121, West George Street, Glasgow. 
Cust, Lionel, Zhe Crescent, Windsor. 
Cust, Miss Anna Maria, 63, E/m Park Gardens, Fulham Road, S.W. 
Cust, Miss Beatrice, 13, Eccleston Square, S.W. 
Dabis, Miss, c/o Mrs. Mond, 20, Avenue Road, Regent's Park, N.W. 
Dakyns, Η. G. (Council), Higher Coombe, Haslemere, Surrey. 
Dalton, Rev. Herbert A., Zhe School House, Felsted, Essex. 
Daniel, A. M., Filey Road, Scarborough. 
Danson, F. C., δ᾽, Liverpool and London Chambers, Liverpool. 
Davidson, H. O. D., Harrow, N.W. 
Davidson, Miss A. M. Campbell, Artillery Mansions, Victoria Street, S.W. 
tDavies, Prof. G. A., University College, Liverpool. | 
Davies, Rev. Gerald S., Charterhouse, Godalming. "ἊΣ 
Dawkins, R. McG., Emmanuel College, Cambridge. 
Dawkins, Sir Clinton, K.C.B., 22, Old Broad Street, E.C. 
Dawson, Rev. A. P., School House, Kibworth, Leicester. 
tDe Filippi, Madame, 2, Green Street, Grosvenor Square, W. 


᾿ XXi 


De Saumarez, Lord, Shrubland Park, Coddenham, Suffolk. 


Devonshire, His Grace the Duke of, K.G., Devonshire House, Piccadilly, W. 


Dickins, G., Vew College, Oxford. 


Dickson, Miss Isabel A., c/o Messrs. J. & W. Macdonald, Solicitors, Arbroath, N.B. 


Dill, Prof. S., Montpelier, Malone Road, Belfast. 

Dobson, Miss, 77, Harcourt Terrace, Redcliffe Square, S.W. 

Donaldson, James, LL.D., Principal of the University, St. Andrews. 
Donaldson, Rev. 8. A., Eton College, Windsor. 

D’Ooge, Prof. Martin L., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, U.S.A. 
Douglas-Pennant, the Hon. Alice, Mortimer House, Halkin Street, S.W. 
Draper, W. H., 13, Hammersmith Terrace, W. 

Drummond, Allan, 7, Zumismore Gardens, S.W. 

Dryhurst, A. R., British Museum, W.C. 

Duchataux, M. Vv, 12, Rue de ?Echauderie, ἃ Reims. 


Duff, Right Hon. Sir Mountstuart Grant, G.C.S.I1., 11, Chelsea Embankment, S.W. 


Duff, Prof. J. Wight, Durham College of Science, Newcastle-on- Tyne. 
Duhn, Prof. von, University, Heidelberg. 

Du Pontet, C. A. A., Tunstall House, Harrow-on-the-Hill. 

Duke, Roger, 9, Pelham Crescent, S.W. 


Dunlap, Miss Mabel Gordon, c/o Messrs. Brown, Shipley & Co., Founders Court, 


Lothbury, E.C. 


Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin, Bart., M.P., 13, Carlton House Terrace S.W. 


Dyer, Louis (Council), Sunbury Lodge, Bandurs Road, Oxford. 
Earp, F. R., The Warren, Upper Warlingham, Surrey. 
Edgar, C. C, Turf Club, Catro. 

Edmonds, Cc. D., Aldenham School, Elstree, Herts. 

Edmonds, J. Maxwell, Aiags School, Canterbury. 

Edwards, G. M., Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge. 


tEgerton, Sir Edwin H., G.C.B., H.B.M. J/inister, British Legation, Athens, Greece. 


Egerton, Mrs. Hugh, 11, Z7te Street, Chelsea, S.W. 

Eld, Rev. Francis J., Polstead Rectory, Colchester. 

Ellis, Prof. Robinson, 77iméty College, Oxford. 

Elwell, Levi H., Amherst College, Amherst, Mass., U.S.A. 

Ely, Talfourd (Council), 13, Weld Road, Hampstead, N.W. 

Eumorfopoulos, N., 33, Gloucester Square, Hyde Park, W. 

Evans, A. J., LL.D, D.Litt., F.R.S. (V.P.), Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. 

Evans, Sir John, K.C.B., D.C.L., F.R.S., Nash Mills, Hemel Hempstead. 
+Evans, Lady, (Council), Wash Wills, Hemel Hempstead. 

Eve, H. W., 37, Gordon Square, W.C. 

Ewart, Miss Mary A., 68, Albert Hall Mansions, S.W. 

Exeter, The Right Rev. The Lord Bishop of, D.D., The Palace, E-veter. 

Fairclough, Prof. H. R., Stanford University, Cal., U.S.A. 

Fanshawe, Reginald, 53, Canynge Road, Clifton, Bristol. 

Farnell, L. R., Ὁ. Litt., Bxeter College, Oxford. 

Farrar, Rev. Canon A. S., D.D., The College, Durham. 

Farside, William, 7horfe Hall, Robin Hoods Bay, Yorkshire. 

Fegan, Miss E. S., Zemplecrowe, Westcombe Park, Blackheath, S. E. 

Felkin, F. W., University College School, Gower Street, W.C. 

Fenning, Rev. W. D., Hazleydury College, Hertford. 

Field, Rev. T., D.D., Radley College, Abingdon. 

Firth, C. M., K ame: Ashburton, Devon. 

Fisher, H. A. L., New College, Oxford. 

Flather, J. H., 52, Bateman Street, Cambridge. 

Fletcher, F., Zhe College, Marlborough. 

Fletcher, H. M., 8, Alexander House, St. Mary’s Terrace, Paddington, W. 

Fletcher, J. Banister, 29, Mew Bridge Street, Ludgate Circus, E.C. 


Foat, F. W. G., Ὁ. Litt., City of London School, .Victoria Embankment, E.C. 


_ +Forbes, W. H., Balliol College, Oxford. 


Xxil 


Ford, Rev. Lionel, Repton Hall, Burton-on-Trent. “| 

Forster, E. M., West Hackhurst, Abinger Hammer, Dorking. ὥ 

Forster, E. S., Woodhill, Crowthorne, Berks. 

Fotheringham, J. K., Magdalen College, Oxford. 

Fowler, Harold N., Ph.D., Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, U.S.A. 
*Fowler, Rev. T., D.D., President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford. 

Fowler, W. Warde, Lincoln College, Oxford. 

Frazer, J. G., LL.D., D.Litt., D.C.L., 7rinity College, Cambridge. 

Freeman, W. George, 163, Parkdale Road, Plumstead. 
*Freshfield, Douglas W. (Hon. Treasurer), 1, Air/ie Gardens, Campden Hill, W. 
tFreshfield, Edwin, LL.D., 31, O/d Jewry, E. C. 

Frost, K. T., Zhe College, Isleworth. 

Fry, Rev. T. C., D.D., Zhe School, Great Berkhampsted. 

Fry, Right fon: Sir Edw ard, D.C.L., Fatland House, Failand, near Bristol. 

Fry, F. J., Cricket St. Thomas, Chard. 
tFurley, J. S., Chernocke House, Winchester. 

Furneaux, L. R., Rossall School, Fleetwood. 

Furness, Miss S. M. M., 2, Zycene Road, Blackheath, S.E. 

Fyfe, Theodore, 4, Gray's Inn Square, W.C. 

Gardiner, E. Norman, Zfsom College, Surrey. 

Gardner, Miss Alice, 7ze Old Hall, Newnham College, Cambridge. 
tGardner, Prof. Ernest A. (V.P.), Zadworth, Surrey. 
*t Gardner, Prof. Percy, Litt.D. (V.P.), 12, Canterbury Road, Oxford. 

Gardner, Samuel, Oakhurst, Harrow-on-the- Hill. 

Gardner, W. Amory, Groton, Massachusetts, U.S.A. 

Garnett, Mrs. Terrell, 3, Queen Anne’s Gate, S.W. 

Garrod, H. W., Corpus Christi College, Oxford. 

Gaselee, S., Azug’s College, Cambridge. 

Gatliff, Hamilton, 11, Eaton Square, S.W. 

Geikie, Sir Archibald, F.R.S., Sc.D., D.C.L., 10, Chester Terrace, Regents Park, N.W. 

Genner, E., Jesus- College, Oxford. 

Gex, R. O. de, Clifton College, Bristol. 

Gibson, Mrs. Margaret D., Castle-brae, Chesterton Road, Cambridge. 

Giles, P., Emmanuel College, Cambridge. 

Gilkes, A. H., Zhe College, Dulwich, S.E. 

Gillespie, A. M., 15, Regen’s Park Avenue, Hyde Park, Leeds, 

Gilliat, Rev. E., Zhe Grange, Bitton, Bristol. 

Giveen, R. L., 66, M/yddleton Square, Clerkenwell, E.C. 

Glover, Miss Helen, 13, Chelsea Gardens, Chelsea, S.W. 

Godden, Miss Gertrude M., Ridgfield, Wimbledon. 

Goodhart, A. M., Eton College, Windsor. 

Goodison, Mrs., 1, Beach Lawn, Waterloo, Liverpool. 

Goodspeed, Edgar J., The University, Chicago, U.S.A. 

Goodwin, Prof. W. W., D.C.L., Cambridge, Mass., U.S.A. 

Gosford, The Countess of, 23, Mansfield Street, Cavendish Square, W. 

Gow, Rev. James, Litt.D. (Council), 19, Dean’s Vard, Westminster, S.W. 

Gower, Lord Ronald, Hammerfield, Penshurst, Kent. 

Granger, F. S., University College, Nottingham. 

Graves, A, S., St. Martin’s, Cambridge. 

Gray, Rev. H. B., Bradfield College, Berks. 

Green, G. Buckland, The Academy, Edinburgh. 

Green, Mrs. J. R., 36, Grosvenor Road, S.W. 

Greene, C. H., Zhe School, Great Berkhampstead. 

Greene, Herbert W., Magdalen College, Oxford. 

Greenwell, Rev. W., F.R.S., Durham. 

Grenfell, B. P., Litt.D., D.Litt. (Council), Queen’s College, Oxford. 

Griffith, F. Ll., Riversvale, Ashton-under-Lyne. 

Griffith, Miss Mary E., 4, Bramham Gardens, S.W. 


; 
‘ 
4 
| 
| 


a ze eg δας σ᾽ St. Margaret s Road, Oxford. 
Ic Place, W. 


ΤΥ 1, 69, Ennismore Gardens, S.W. ᾽ 

atch Kings College, Cambridge. 
A , W. H., <j phos College, Oxford. 

Haigh A. E., 4, Norham Gardens, Oxford. 

‘Hall, Rev. F. H., Oriel College, Oxford. 

Hall, Rev. F. J., ‘ Northaw Place, Potter s Bar, Herts. 

Hall, F. W., St. John’s College, Oxford. 

Hall, Harry Reginald, British Museum, W.C. 

_ Hall, Miss S. E., το, Gardnor Mansions, Church Row, Hampstead. 
᾿ς Hallam, G. H., Zhe Park, Harrow, N.W. 

Hambidge, Jay. 

tHammond, B. E., Zrinity College, Cambridge. 
Hardie, Prof. W. Ross, Zhe University, Edinburgh. 
Harding, G. V., Pentwyn, near Monmouth. 
Hardy, F. A., Scot House, Kinnear Road, Edinburgh. 
Harper, Miss Barbara, Queen’s, College, 43, Harley Street, W. 
Harris, H. B., 37, Kensington Square, W. 
Harris, Prof. William Fenwick, 8, Mercer Circle, Cambridge, Mass., U.S.A. 

tHarrison, Ernest, 7yinity College, Cambridge. 

tHarrison, Miss J. E., LL.D., D.Litt. (Council), Mewnham College, Cambridge. 
Harrison, Miss L., E//eray, Linnet Lane, Liverpool. 
Harrower, Prof. John, Zhe University, Aberdeen. 
Hart, H. G. 
Hart, J. H. A., St. John’s College, Cambridge. 
Hart-Smith, Rev. T. A., Epsom College, Surrey. 
Haslam, S., The School, Uppingham. 
Hasluck, F. W., The Wilderness, Southgate, N. 
Haussoullier, B., 8, Rue Sainte-Cécile, Paris. 

tHaverfield, F. J., Christ Church, Oxford. 
Hawes, C. H., 7rinity College, Cambridge. 
Hawes, Miss E. P., 89, Oxford Terrace, W. 

tHay, C. A., 127, Harley Street, W. 
Haynes, E. S. P., 9, Mew Square, Lincoln’s Inn, W.C. 
Hayter, Angelo G. K., 4, Forest Rise, Walthamstow, Essex. 
Head, Barclay Vincent, D.C. L., British Museum, W. C. 
Head, John Alban, 6, Clarence Torrie, N.W. 
Headlam, C. E. S., 4, Smith Square, Westminster, S.W. 
Headlam, J. W. 1, Benet Place, Cambridge. 
Headlam, W. G., Kings College, Cambridge. 
Heard, Rev. W. A., Fettes College, Edinburgh. 

_ tHeathcote, W. E., Clevehurst, Stoke Poges, near Slough. 
Heberden, C. B., Principal of Brasenose College, Oxford. 
Hedgcock, Mrs. Harrison, 21, Caversham Road, N.W. 
Henderson, Arthur E., c/o the Architectural Association, 58, Great Marlborough St., W. 

ten Henderson, Bernard W., E-veter College, Oxford. 

Hereford, The Lord Bishop of, The Palace, Hereford. 

tHertz, Miss Henriette, Zhe Poplars, 20, Avenue Road, N.W. 

Hewitt, J. F., Holton Cottage, Oxford. ᾿ 

Heyer, G., King's College School, Wimbledon, S.W. 

ee Alfred, 16, King Street, Portman Square, W. 

ge F. (Council), British Museum, W.C. 

. Barnard College, New York City. 
eae Ἦν Sheffield. 


d Villa, Twickenham. 
ae Savile Club, 107, Piccadilly; W. 


L 


es 
~~ sf 


’ 
- 


χχὶν 


Holiday, Henry, Oak Tree House, Branch Hill, Hampstead NW. 
Holland, Miss Emily, 24, Homefield Road Wimbledon. 
Hopkinson, J. H., Zhe University, Birmingham. 
Hoppin, J. C., Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, Pa., U.S.A. 
Hornby, Rev. J. J., D.D., Provost of Eton College, Windsor. 
Horner, J. F. F., 9, Buckingham Gate, S.W. 
+Hort, Sir Arthur F., Bart., Gav/ands, Harrow. 
Hose, H. F., Dulwich College, Dulwich, S.E. 
Hoste, Miss M. R., St. Augustine's, Blackwater Road, Eastbourne. 
House, H. H., The College, Malvern. 
Housley, Samuel J., Gynsdal, Waterloo Road, Epsom. 
How, W. W., Merton College, Oxford. 
Howorth, Sir Henry H., K.C.I.E., F.R.S., 30, Collingham Place, S.W. 
Huddart, Rev. G. A. W., Kirklington Rectory, Bedale, Yorks. 
Huddilston, J. H., Ph.D., Zhe University of Maine, Orono, Maine, U.S.A. 
Hudson, William T., University College, Bangor. 
Hiigel, Baron Friedrich von, 4, Holford Road, Hampstead, N.W. 
Hulse, Miss Caroline M., 
Hunt, A. S., D.Litt. (Council), Queen’s College, Oxford. 
Hutchinson, Sir J. T., Chief Justice of Cyprus, costa, Cyprus. 
Hutchinson, Miss W. M. L., River House, Upper Mall, Hammersmith, W. 
Hutton, Miss C. A., 49, Drayton Gardens, S.W. 
Image, Selwyn, 20, /ztzroy Street, W.C. 
Jackson, Rev. Blomfield, 29, Jecklenburgh Square, W.C. 
Jackson, Henry, Litt.D., 7rinity College, Cambridge. 
Jackson, Mrs. F. H. 74, Rutland Gate, S.W. 
Jackson, Rev. W. W., Rector of Exeter College, Oxford. 
*James, The Rev. H. A, D.D., School House, Rugby. 
James, H. R., Zhe ey Calcutta. 
James, Lionel, S¢. Peter’s College, Radley, Abingdon. 
Janvier, Mrs. Thomas A., c/o Brown, Shipley and Co., 123, Pall Mall, S.W. 
Jeans, Rev. G. E., Shorwell, Newport, Isle of Wight. 
*Jebb; Sir Richard, ΡΟ LL.D. Litt. D.,. Me: iis ati Springheld, Newnham, 
Cambridge. 
Jenkinson, F. J. H., 77¢nzty College, Cambridge. 
Jenner, Miss Lucy A., 39, Addison Road, Kensington, W. 
Jevons, F. B., Zhe Castle, Durham. 
Jex-Blake, Miss, Girton College, Cambridge. 
Joachim, Miss M., Highlands, Haslemere, Surrey. 
Jonas, Maurice, 9, Bedford Square, W.C. 
tJones, H. Stuart, Trinity College, Oxford. 
Jones, W. H. S., The Perse School, Cambridge. 
Judge, Max, 7, Pall Mall, S.W. 
Karo, George, Akacemisches Kunstmuseum, Bonn a/Rhein. 
Keene, Prof. Charles H., University Club, Dublin. 
Keith, A. Berriedale, Colonial Office, Downing Street, S.W. 
Kelly, Charles Arthur, 30, Cheyne Walk, Chelsea, S.W. 
Keltie, J. S., LL.D., Glendevon House, Compayne Gardens, Hampstead, N.W. 
Kempthorne, Rev. P.H., Wellington College, Berks. 
Kennedy, J., 12, Frognal Lane, Finchley Road, N.W. 
Kensington, Miss Frances, 83, Gloucester Terrace, Hyde Park, Wy 
Kenyon, F. G., D.Litt. (Council), British Museum, W.C. 
Ker, Prof. W. Ῥ, .. 95, Gower Street, W.C. 
Kerr, Prof. Alesaader, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A. 
Keser, Dr. J., Colatel, Chemin Vinet, Lausanne. 
Kettlewell, Rev. P. W. H., 1, Albert Road, Clifton, Bristul. 
Kieffer, Prof. John B., College Aveuue, Lancaster, Pa., U.S.A. 
King, J. E., Grammar School, Bedford. 


<ing, J. R., St. Peter’s Vicarage, Oxford. 
rh Se Ra ton, Brmiham. ve te te 
James, Queen Anne's Lodge, St. James Park, SW. 
Z τύπος Olivia C., 65, Brondesbury Road, N.W. 
_ Lane, Mrs. Charles T.; Dangstein, Petersfield. 
Lang, Andrew, LL.D., 1, Marloes Road, Kensington, yee 
᾿ς -*Lang, Sir R. Hamilton, K.C.M.G., The Grove, Dedham, Essex. 
__ Langdon-Davies, B. N., Copt Hill, Burgh Heath, Surrey. 
Langton, Neville, Bedle "Vue Flouse, Catel, Guernsey. 
Lathbury, Miss, 19, Lingfield Road, Wimbledon, S.W. 
La Touche, C. D., 53, Raglan Road, Dublin. 
tLansdowne, The Most Hon. the Marquess of, K.G., G.C.S.I., G.C.LE., G.C.M.G., 
Bowood, Calne, Wilts. 
Latour, Miss de, 178, Zar/s Court Road, S.W. 
Leaf, Herbert, 716 Green, Marlborough. 
tLeaf, Walter, Litt.D. (V.P.), 6, Sussex Place, Regent’s Park, N. W. 
Lecky, Mrs., 38, Onslow Gardens, S.W. 
Lehn, The Baroness Rosenérn—, Hirdkilde, Svendborg, Vicemeek 
Leeper Alexander, Warden of Trinity College, Melbourne. 
Lee-Warner, Miss Evelyn, Lynwode, Godalming. 
Legge, F., 6, Gray’s Inn Square, W.C. 
Leigh, Rev. A. Austen, Provost of King’s College, Cambridge. 
Leigh, H. D., Corpus Christi College, Oxford. 
Leigh, W. Anabei, 2, Norfolk Crescent, Hyde 7 W. 
Lewis, Harry R., 5, Avxgy// Road, Kensington, ΤῊ, 
Γ tLewis, Mrs. 8. S., Castle-brae, Chesterton Road, Cambridge. 
Leycester, Mrs. Rafe, 6, Cheyne Walk, S.W. 
Lindley, Miss Julia, 10, Kidbrook Terrace, Shooter's Hill Rd., S.E. 
Lingen, The Right Hon. Lord, K.C.B.,-13, Wetherby Gardens, S.W. 
Lingen, Lady, 13, Wetherby Gardens, S.W. 
Lister, Hon. Reginald, British Legation, Copenhagen. 
Lloyd, Miss A. M., Caythorpe Hall, Grantham. 
+Lock, Rev. W., D.D., Keble College, Oxford. 
t+Loeb, James, 37, East 38¢h Street, New York. 
Loeschcke, Dr. von, Universitat, Bonn. 
Longman, Miss Mary, Girton College, Oxford. 
Lorimer, Miss H. L., Somerville College, Oxford. 
δ tLoring, William (Council), County Hall, Wakefield. 
Luce, Rev. E., 9, Royal Crescent, Brighton, 
ἡ Lunn, Henry S., M.D., Oldfield House, Harrow-on-the-Hill, 
’ Lunn, W. Holdsworth, 5, Zxdsleigh Gardens, N.W. 
Lupton, Rev. J. M., Zhe College, Marlborough. 
Lyttelton, Hon. and Rev. E., Haileydury College, Hertford: 
*Macan, R. W., University College, Oxford. 
McAnally, H. W. W., War Office, Pall Mall, S.W. 
7 McArthur, A. G., 28, Linden Gardens, W. 
ΠΤ McDaniel, J. H., Hobart College, Geneva, N.Y. 
McDougall, Miss Eleanor, Willow Lodge, Moss Lane, East Manchester. 
McDowall, Miss Katherine Ada, 166, Holland Road, Kensington, W. 
Macdonald, George (Council), 7he Universtiy, Glasgow. 

Miss Louisa, Women’s College, Sydney University, Sydney, N.S.W. 
aa W. R., LL:D., Bridgefield, Bridge of Don, Aberdeenshire. 
Ewen, Rev. Prof. Alex. Robertson, 5, Doune Terrace, Edinburgh. 
ogilliy Rs. Pittendrigh, Ravelstow Elms, Murrayfield, Edinburgh. 

. Randall, Wolverton’ House, Clifton, Bristol. 
e, W. W. 150, Byres Road, Glasgow. 
ποτ Δ βίην Piece Wimbledon, S.W. 
he Avenne, Brondesbury, N.W. 


Mackenzie, Duncan, 34, Via Monte Giordano, Rome. 
Mackenzie, R. J., 12, Great Stuart Street, Edinburgh. 
MacLehose, James J., 61, St. Vincent Street, Glasgow. 
Macmillan, Mrs. Alexander, Bramshott Chase, Shottermill, Surrey. 
*Macmillan, George A., D.Litt. (Hon. Sec.), St. Martin’s Street, W.C. 
Macmillan, Mrs. George A., 19, Earls Terrace, Kensington, W. 
Macmillan, Maurice, 52, Cadogan Place, S.W. 
+Macmillan, W. E. F., King’s College, Cambridge. 
+Macnaghten, Hugh, Z/on College, Windsor, 
Macnaghten, The Right Hon. Lord, 3, New Square, Lincoin’s Inn, W.C. 
Maculloch, Mrs. Matilda, 
tMagrath, Rev. J. R., Provost of Queen’s College, Oxford. 
*Mahaffy, Rev. J. P., D.D., D.C.L., 7vinity College, Dublin. 
Mair, Prof. A. W., Zhe University, Edinburgh. 
Malden, R. H., King’s College, Cambridge. 
t+Malim, F. B. Marlborough College, Wilts. 
Mallet, P. W., 25, Highbury New Park, N. 
Manatt, Prof. Irving, Brown University, Providence, R.I., U.S.A. 
tMarindin, G. E. (Council), Chesterton, Bridgnorth, Salop. 
*Marquand, Prof. Allon, Priaceton College, New Jersey, U.S.A. 
Marsh, E., 3, Gray’s Inn Place, W.C. 
Marshall, Miss, Far Cross, Woore, Newcastle, Staffs. 
Marshall, Frederick, British Museum, W.C, 
Marshall, J. H., Ravensdale, Simla, India. 
Marshall, John, Lewes House, Lewes. 
Marshall, Prof. J. W., University College of Wales, Aberystwyth. 
Marshall, R., 31, Zhe Waldrons, Croydon. 
Marshall, T., Highfield, Chapel Allerton, Leeds. 
Martin, Charles B., The College, Oberlin, Ohio, U.S.A. 
+Martin, R. B., M.P., 10, A277 Street, W. 
tMartyn Edward,. 77//yra Castle, Ardrahan, County Galway. 
Massy, Lieut.-Colonel P. H. H., H.AZ.V. Consulate, Mersina, Asia Minor. 
Matheson, P. E., Mew College, Oxford. 
Mavrogordato, J., Exeter College, Oxford. 
Mavrogordato, Pandeli A., 1, Aimg’s Arms Yard, Moorgate Street, E.C. 
Mayor, H. B., Clifton College, Bristol. 
Mayor, Rev. Prof. Joseph B., Queensgate House, Kingston Hiill, Surrey. 
Mayor, R. J. G. (Council), Board of Education, Whitehall, S.W. 
Measures, A. E., King Edward VI. School, Birmingham. 
Merry, Rev. W. W., Rector of Lincoln College, Oxford. 
Methuen, A. M. S., Mew Place, Haslemere. 
Miller, William, 10, Cheyne Gardens, Chelsea, S.W. 
Milliet, P., 95, Boulevard St. Michel,»Paris. 
Millington, Miss M. V., 1, St. Anne’s Villas, Holland Park Avenue, W. 
Milne, J. Grafton, Mansfield House, Canning Town, E. 
Milner, His Excellency Viscount, G.C.B., Government House, Pretoria, S. Africa. 
Minet, Miss Julia, 18, Sussex Square, Hyde Park, W. 
Minns, Ellis H., Pembroke College, Cambridge. 
Minturn, Miss L. T., 14, Chelsea Embankment, S.W. 
tMocatta, F. D., 9, Connaught Place, Edgware Road, W. 
Moline, Miss 1. P., 172, Church Street, Stoke Newington, N. 
tMond, Mrs. Frida, 736 Poplars, 20, Avenue Road, Regent’s Park, N.W. 
Monro, D. B., Litt.D., LL.D. (V.P.), Provost of Oriel College, Oxford, 


Monson, His Excellency the Right Hon. Sir E. J., G.C.B,, G.C.M.G., H.B.M. 


Ambassador, British Embassy, Paris. 
Moore, B. P., 75, Holland Road, Kensington, W. 
Morgan, Prof. J. Morris, Harvard College, Cambridge, Mass, U.S.A. 
Morgan, Miss, 64, Scarsdale Villas, Kensington, W. 


: . 
. xxvii 
" - 


Ἢ δ, i “we - 


Morice, Rev. F. D., Mount-Hermon, Woking. : 
*Morley, The Right Hon, the Earl of, 31, Prince’s Gardens, S.W. 
tMorshead, Ε, Ὁ. A., The College, Winchester. 
Moss, The Rev. H. W., Zhe School House, Shrewsbury. 
- Mount, Rev. C. B., 14, Morham Road, Oxford. 
tMount, J. T., Zon College, Windsor. 
Moxon, Rev. T. Allen, 106, Goldsmith Street, Nottingham. 
tMunro, J. A. R., Lincoln College, Oxford. 
Murray, A. S., LL.D. (V.P.), British Museum, W.C, 
Murray, G. G. A., Barford, Churt, Farnham. 
tMyers, Ernest (Council), Brackenside, Chislehurst. 
*Myres, J. Linton (Council), Christ Church, Oxford. 
Naef, Conrad, J., Zhe Admiralty, S.W. 
tNairn, Rev. J. Arbuthnot, Merchant Taylors’ School, E.C. 
Newman, W. L., Litt.D., Pittville Lawn, Cheltenham. 
κ Nicholson, Sir Charles, Bart., The Grange, Totteridge, Herts. 
ἢ Noack, Prof. Ferdinand, Oberer Philosophenweg, 6, Jena. 
Northampton, The Most Hon. the Marquis of, 51, Lennox Gardens, S.W. 
Odgers, Rev. J. Edwin, D.D., 145, Woodstock Road, Oxford. 
Ogilvy, Miss Alison, 12, Prince Edwards Mansions, Pembridge Square, W. 
Ommanney, Admiral Sir Erasmus K., 29, Connaught Square, W, 
Osgood, Hamilton, M.D., 388, Beacon Street, Boston, U.S.A. 
Page, T. E., Charterhouse, Godalming. 
Pallis, Alexander, 7atoi, Aigburgh Drive, Liverpool. 
Parry, Rev. O. H., /uglehope, Cranmer Road, Cambridge. 
Parry, Rev. R. St. J., Zvinity College, Cambridge. 
Paton, James Morton, Westleyan University, Middletown, Conn., U.S.A. 
Paton, W. R., Maison Camus, Place Marc, Viroflay, Seine-et-Oise, France. 
Paton, J. Lewis, Grammar School, Manchester. 
Payne-Smith, Rev. W. H., 10, Hl/morton Road, Rugby. 
Pearmain, S. B., 388, Beacon Street, Boston, U.S.A. 
Pears, Edwin, 2, Rue de la Banque, Constantinople. 
Peckover, Alexander, Wisbech, Cambs. 
Peckover, Miss Alexandrina, Bank House, Wisbech. 
Peers, C. R., 96, Grosvenor Road, 5.W. 
Peile, John, Litt.D., Master of Christ's College, Cambridge. 
Pelham, Hon. Mrs. Arthur, 15, Duke Street, Manchester Square, W. 
Pelham, Professor H. F. (V.P.), President of Trinity College, Oxford. 
Pember, E. H., K.C., Vicars Hill, near Lymington, Hants. 
Penrose, Miss Emily (Council), Royal Holloway College, Englefield Green, S.O., Surrey. 
+Percival, F. W., 2, Southwick Place, Hyde Park Square, W. 
Perkins, O. T., Wellington College, Berks. 
Perry, Prof. Edward Delavan, Columbia University, New York City, U.S.A. 
Pesel, Miss Laura, Oak House, Bradford. 
Philips, Mrs. Herbert, Sut/on Oaks, Macclesfield. 
Phillimore, Prof. J. S., Zhe University, Glasgow. 
Philpot, Hamlet S.,.7he County School, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A. 
Pinckney, A. B., 95, High Street, Worcester. 
+Platt, Prof. Arthur, 5, Chester Terrace, N.W. 
Pogson-Smith, W. G., St. John’s College, Oxford. 
Pollard, A. T., City of London School, Victoria Embankment, EC. 
Pollock, Sir Frederick, Bart., 48, Great Cumberland Place, W. 
____ tPope, Mrs. 6. H., 60, Banbury Road, Oxford.” 
᾿ς tPostgate, Prof. J. P., Litt.D., 7rinity College, Cambridge. 
Powell, Sir F. S., Bart., M.P., 1, Cambridge Square, Hyde Park, W. 
Powell, John U., St. John’s College, Oxford. 
__ Poynter, Sir Edward J., Bart., Litt.D., D.C.L., P.R.A., 28, A/bert Gate, S.W. 
Preece, Sir William H., Gothic Lodge, Wimbledon Common, S.W. 


ΩΣ 


xxviii 

Pretor A., 2, Camden Place, Wyte, Weymouth. 

Price, Miss Mabel, Charlton, Headington, Oxford. 

Prickard, A, O., Mew College, Oxford. 

Proctor, R. G. C., British Museum, W.C. 

Prothero, Henry, 13, Promenade, Cheltenham. 
+Pryor, Francis R., Woodfield, Hatfield, Herts. 

Psychari, A., 38, Boulevard de Courcelles, Paris. 

Quibell, Mrs. Annie A., Gizeh Museum, Egyft. 

Radcliffe, W. W., Fonthill, East Grinstead, Sussex. 
+Raleigh, Miss Katherine, A., Beechwood, Loudwater, Bucks. 
*Ralli, Pandeli, 17, Belgrave Square, S.W, . | 
+Ralli, Mrs. Stephen A., St. Catherine's Lodge, Hove, Sussex, | 

Ramsay, Prof. G. G., The University, Glasgow. ye | 
+Ramsay, Prof. W. M., D.C.L., Litt.D. (V.P.), The University, Aberdeen. ᾿ 

Ransome, Miss C. L., c/o Messrs. Brown, Shipley and Co., 123, Pall Mall, S.W. 

Rawlins, F, H., Eton College, Windsor. 

Rawnsley, W. F., Loughrigg Holme, Ambleside. 

Reade, Essex E., 24, Bolton Street, Mayfair, W. 

Reece, Miss Dora, 26, Budlingham Mansion, Pitt Street, Kensington, W. 

Reid, Prof. J. S., Litt.D., Cazus College, Cambridge. 
+Reinach, Salomon, 31, Rue de Berlin, Paris. 

Rendall, Rev. F., 82, PAilbeach Gardens, S.W. 
+Rendall, Rev. 6, H., Litt.D., Charterhouse, Godalming. 
+Rendall, Montague, The College, Winchester. 

Richards, Rev. G, C. (Council), Orvzel College, Oxford, 

Richards, F., Kingswood School, Bath, 

Richards, H. P., Wadham College, Oxford. 

Richmond, Sir W. B., K.C.B., D.C.L., R.A., Bevor Lodge, West End, Hammersmith, W. 

Ridgeway, Prof. W. (Council), Fen Ditton, Cambridge. 

Ridley, Sir Edward, Cradbbet Park, Crawley, Sussex. 

Rigg, Herbert A., 13, Queen’s Gate Place, S.W. 

Robb, Mrs., 46, Rutland Gate, S.W. 

Roberts, Rev. E. S., Master of Caius College, Cambridge. 

Roberts, J. Slingsby, 13, Old Sguare, Lincoln’s Inn, W.C. 

Roberts, Principal T. F., Sherborne House, Aberystwith, 7 

Roberts, Professor W. Rhys, University College of North Wales, Bangor. 

Robertson, Miss Hilda, 57, Harrington Gardens, W. 

Robinson Edward, Director of Museum of Fine Aris, Boston, Mass, U.S.A. 

Robinson, α. G., All Side, Godalming. 

Robinson, T. P. G., Ashfield, Rothsay Place, Bedford. 

Robinson, W. S., 53, Courtfield Gardens, Kensington, W. 

Rodd, Sir Rennell, K.C.M.G., 17, Stratford Place, W. 

Rogers, Benjamin Bickley, Zastwood, Strawberry Hill, Twickenham. 

Rome, W., Creeksea Place, Burnham-on-Crouch, 
+Rosebery, The Right Hon, the Earl of K.G., 38, Berkeley Square, W. 

Ross, W. D., Oriel College, Oxford. 

Rotton, Sir J. F., Lockwood, Frith Hill, Godalming, Surrey. 

Rous, Lieut.-Colonel, Worstead House, Norwich. 
+Rouse, W. H. D., Litt.D., 16, Brookside, Cambridge. 

Ruben, Paul, 39, Lerham Gardens, Kensington, W. 

Rubie, Rev. Alfred Ε,, Zhe Royal Naval School, Eltham, S.E. 

Riicker, Miss S. C., 4, Vanbrugh Terrace, Blackheath, S.E. 

Riicker, Principal Sir A. W., D.Sc., F.R.S., 19, Gledhow Gardens, S. Kensington, S. wo 

Runtz, Ernest, 11, Walbrook, Ἐ;Ο 

Rustafjaell, R. de, 1, Down Street, Piccadilly, W. 

Rutherford, Rev. W. Gunion, LL,D., Zzttle Hallands, Bishopsione, Lewes. 

Sambon, M. Arthur, 6, Rue de Port Mahon, Paris. ͵ 
S amuel, Mrs. Sylvester, 80, Onslow Gardens, S.W. , 


; xxix | 


Sanborn, F. B., Concord, Mass., U.S.A. 

+Sandys, J. E., Litt.D. (V.P.), St. John’s College, Cambridge, 
tSandys, Mrs., Merton House, Cambridge. 
+*Sayce, Rev. Prof. A. H., LL.D, (V.P.),8, Chalmers Crescent, Edinburgh. 
+Scaramanga, A. P., 18, Barkston Gardens, Kensington, S.W. 
Schilizzi, John S., 31, Cromwell Road, S. Kensington, S.W. 
Schultz, R. Weir, 6, Mandeville Place, W. 

Schuster, Ernest, 12, Harrington Gardens, S.W. 

Scouloudi, Stephanos, Athens, Greece. 

Scull, Miss Sarah A., Smethport, McKean Co., Pa., U.S.A. 

Seaman, Owen, Zower House, West Hill, Putney, S.W. 

Secker, W. H., Aysgarth School, Newton-le-Willows, R.S.O., Yorks. 
Seebohm, Hugh, 7he Hermitage, Hitchin. 

Seltman, Εἰ. J., Kinghoe, Great Berkhamsted, Herts. 

tSelwyn, Rev. E. C., D.D., School House, Uppingham. 

+Sendall, Sir Walter J., G.C.M.G., 91, Cornwall Gardens, S.W. 
Seymour, Prof. Thomas D., Yale College, Newhaven, U.S.A. 
Shadwell, C. L., D.C.L., Oriel College, Oxford. 

Sharkey, J. A., Christ’s College, Cambridge. 

Sharpe, Miss Mary H., Harold House, Lansdowne Road, W. 
Sharpe, Miss Catherine, Stoneycroft, Elstree, Herts. 
Sherwell, John W., Sadler's Hall, Cheapside, E.C. 

Shewan, Alexander, Seehof, St. Andrews, Fife. 

Shipley, H. S., H.B.M. Consul, British Legation, Cettinjé. 
Shove, Miss E., 25, St. Mark’s Crescent, Regent’s Park, N.W. 
Shuckburgh, E. S., Litt.D., Granchester, Cambridge. 

_ Sidgwick, Arthur, Corpus Christi College, Oxford. 

. Sikes, Edward Ernest (Council), St. John’s College, Cambridge. 
Silcox, Miss, High School for Girls, West Dulwich, S.E. 
Simpson, H. B., 18, Brompton Square, S.W. 

tSing, J. M., S. Edwards School, Oxford. 


: *Skrine, Rev. J. H., Zéchen Stoke Rectory, Alresford, Hants. 

, Slater, Howard, Wathi, New Zealand. 

᾿ Slinger, Miss Ealie, 7hree Elms, Lancaster. 

‘ Sloane, Miss Eleanor, 13, Welford Road, Leicester, 

; tSmith, A. Hamilton (Council), 22, Endsleigh Street, W.C. 

Ψ Smith, Cecil, LL.D. (Council), 18, Zar?’s Terrace, Kensington, W. 
᾽ Smith, F. E. J., 2, Ζαγιοαῖ Court, Inner Temple, E.C. 


+Smith, Prof. Goldwin, The Grange, Toronto, Canada. 
Smith, H. Babington, C.S.I., General Post Office, St. Martin’s-leeGrand, E.C. 
Smith, R, Elsey, 7, Gordon Street, Gordon Square, W.C. 
Smith, Reginald J., K.C., 11, Hyde Park Street, W. 
Smith, S. C. Kaines, 3, Wymering Mansions, Elgin Avenue, W, 
tSnow, T. C., St. John’s College, Oxford. 
t+Somerset, Arthur, Castle Goring, Worthing. 
. Sonnenschein, Prof. E. A., 7, Barnsley Road, Birmingham. 
tSouthwell, The Right Rev. the Bishop of, 7hurgarton Priory, Southwell. 
Sowels, F., Zhe Rookery, Thetford, Norfolk. 
Spiers, Phené, Car/ton Chambers, 12, Regent Street, W. 
Spilsbury, A. J., City of London School, Victoria Embankment, E.C. - 
Spooner, Rev. W. A., Warden of New College, Oxford. 
Stanford, C. Thomas, 3, Zxmismore Gardens, S.W. 
Stannus, Hugh, 32, Highbury Place, N. 
Stanton, Charles H., Fie/d Place, Stroud, Gloucestershire, 
Statham, H. Heathcote, 40, Gower Street, W.C. 
+Stawell, Miss Ε, Melian, 44, Westbourne Park Villas, W. 
Steel, Charles G., Barby Road, Rugby. 
Steele, D., 23, Homer Street, Athens. 


ΧΧΧ 


Steele, Dr., 2, Via Pico della Mirandola, Florence. 
Steele, Mrs. D., 23, Homer Street, Athens. 
Stevenson, F. S., M.P., 5, Hvmismore Gardens, S.W. 
+Stevenson, Miss E. C., 13, Randolph Crescent, Edinburgh. cs 
Stevenson, Miss E. F., E/tham Court, Eltham, Kent. : 
Stewart, Prof. J. A., Christ Church, Oxford. 
Stewart, Mrs. H. F., Zhe Malting House, Cambridge. 
Stogdon, Rev. Edgar, Harrow, NV. W. ‘ 
Stogdon, J., Harrow, N.W. 
Stone, E. W., Eton College, Windsor. ἐν 2. 
Stone, Rev. E. D., Abingdon. 
Storey-Maskelyne, N. H. W., F.R.S., Basset Down House, Wroughton, Swindon. 
Storr, Rev. Vernon F., Bramshott Rectory, Liphook, Hants. 
Strachan-Davidson, J. L., Balliol College, Oxford. : 
Stretton, Gilbert W., Zhe College, Dulwich, S.E. 
Strong, Mrs. S. Arthur, LL.D. (Council). 
Struthers, John, C.B., Dover House, Whitehall, S.W. 
Sturgis, Julian R., 16, Hans Road, S.W. 
Sturgis, Russell, 307, Hast 17th Street, New York. 
Surr, Watson, 57, Old Broad Street, E.C. 
+Tait, C. W. A., Clifton College, Bristol. 
Tancock, Rev. C. C., D.D., The School House, Tonbridge. 
Tarbell, Prof. F. B., University of Chicago, Chicago, 711., U.S.A. 
Tarn, W. W., 2, Mew Square, Lincoln’s Inn, W.C. 
Patton, Εν; 
Tayler, Miss Margaret, Royal Holloway College, Egham. 
+Taylor, Rev. Charles, D.D., Master of St. John’s College, Cambridge. 
Thackeray, H. St. John, Board of Education, Whitehall, S.W. 
Thomas, M. T., 7, Rysdale Terrace, Middlesbrough. 
*Thompson, Sir E. M., K.C.B., D.C.L. (V.P.), British Museum, W.C. 
Thompson, F. E. (Council), 16, Primrose Hill Road, N. W. 
Thompson, Henry F. H., 35, Wimpole Street, W. 
+Thompson, Miss Anna, Boynton, Zhayer Academy, South Braintree, Mass., U.S.A. 
Thomson, A. Douglas, Litt.D., Greystonebank, Dumfries. | 
Thursfield, J. R., Fxyth, Great Berkhampstead. ; 
Tilley, Arthur, Aznmg’s College, Cambridge. 
‘Tod, Marcus N., Sans Souct, The Park, Highgate, N. 
*+Tozer, Rev. H. F., 18, Morham Gardens, Oxford. 
+Truell, H. P., F.R.C.S., Clonmannon, Ashford, Co. Wicklow. 
*+Tuckett, F. F., Frenchay, near Bristol. 
Tudeer, Dr. Emil, He/singfors, Finland. 
+Turnbull, Mrs. Peveril, Sandy-Brook Hall, Ashbourne. 
Tyler, C. H., Rossall School, Fleetwood. 
Tylor, Prof. E. B., D.C.L., F.R.S., The Museum House, Oxford. 
Tyrrell, Prof. R. Y., Litt.D., D.C.L., LL.D. (V.P.), 7rinity College, Dublin. 
Underhill, G. E., Magdalen College, Oxford. 
Upcott, L. E. The College, Marlborough. 
Valetta, J. N., 16, Durham Terrace, Westbourne Gardens, W. 
+Valieri, Octavius, 2, Kensington Park Gardens, W. 
+Vaughan, E. L., Eton College, Windsor. 
Verrall, A. W., Litt.D., Z7inity College, Cambridge. 
Verrall, Mrs. A. W., Selwyn Gardens, Cambridge. 
Vincent, Sir Edgar, K.C.M.G., M.P., Esher Place, Surrey. 
+Viti de Marco, Marchesa di, Palazzo Orsini, Monte Savello, Rome. 
Vlasto, Michel P , 12, Ad/ée des Capucins, Marseilles. 
+Vlasto, T. A., Bouevaine, Sefton Park, Liverpool. 
Wace, A. J. B., Calverton House, Stoney Stratford. 
Wackernagel, Prof. Jacob, The University, Gottingen, Germany. 


Wade, Armigel de V., St. Petsoe Minor, St. Issey, Cornwall. 
+Wagner, Henry, 13, Half Moon Street, W. 
+Waldstein, Charles, Ph.D., Litt.D. (V.P.), King’s College, Cambridge. 
Walford, Mrs. Neville, Sortridge, Horrabridge, South Devon. 
aa Walker, Miss D. L., Regent Lodge, Headingley, Leeds. 
᾿». Walker, Rev. E. M., Queen’s College, Oxford. 
Walker, Rev. F. A., D.D., Dun Mallard, Shootup Hill, Brondesbury, N.W. 
Walters, Henry Beauchamp (Council), British Museum, W.C. 
Ward, Arnold S., 25, Grosvenor Place, S.W. 
Ward, John, Lenoxvale, Belfast. 
Ward, T. H., 25, Grosvenor Place, S.W. 
tWarre, Rev. Edmond, D.D., Eton College, Windsor. 
Warren, T. H., President of Magdalen College, Oxford. 
Warren, E. P., Lewes House, Lewes, Sussex. 
Warren, Mrs. Fiske, 8, Mount Vernon Place, Boston, U.S.A. 
Waterfield, Rev. R., Zhe College, Cheltenham. 
Waterhouse, Edwin, Fe/demore, near Dorking. 
Waterhouse, Miss M. E., 59, Edge Lane, Liverpool. 
Waterlow, S. P. P., British Embassy, Washington, U.S.A. 
Watson, Mrs., Burnopfield, Co. Durham 
*Way, Rev. J. P., D.D., The Hall, Rossall, Fleetwood. 
+Weber, F. P., M.D., 19, Harley Street, W. 
Weber, Sir Hermann, M.D., 10, Grosvenor Street, W. 
Wedd, N., King’s College, Cambridge. 
Weir, Miss Edith, 4, /rognal, Hampstead, N.W. 
Welch, F. B., 8, Brandram Road, Lee, Blackheath. 
Weld-Blundell, Herbert, 100, Holywell, Oxford. 
+Welldon, The Right Rev. Bishop, Little Cloisters, Westminster, S.W. 
Wells, }., Wadham College, Oxford. 
Wells, R. Douglas, 171, Queen’s Gate, S.W. 
Welsh, Miss M., Newnham College, Cambridge. 
Westlake, Prof. J., LL.D., Zhe River House, Chelsea Embankment, S.W. 
Whately, A. P., 4, Southwick Crescent, Hyde Park, W. 
Wheeler, Benjamin Ide, President of the University of California, Berkeley, Cal., U.S.A. 
Wheeler, Prof. James.R., Ph.D., Columbia College, New York City, U.S.A. 
Whibley, Leonard, Pembroke College, Cambridge. 
White, Miss R. E., Newnham College, Cambridge. 
White, Mrs. Andrew, 
White, Prof. J. Williams, Ph.D., LL.D., Litt.D., Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A. 
White, J. N., Rockland, Waterford. 
tWhitehead, ΚΕ. R., Woodstock, Ulster Co., N.Y., U.S.A. 
Wickham, The Very Rev. E. C., The Deanery, Lincoln. 
Wilkins, Rev. George, 36, 7rinity College, Dublin. 
Wilkins, Prof. A. S., LL.D., Litt.D. (Council), The Owens College, Manchester. 
Wilkinson, Herbert, 10, Orme Square, W. 
Williams, T. Hudson, University College, Bangor. 
Wilson, Donald, Wavertree, Beverley Road, Hull. 
Wilson, H. C. B., Crofton Hall, Crofton, near Wakefield. 
+Winchester, the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of, D.D., Farnham Castle, Surrey. 
Windley, Rev. H. C., St. Chad's, Bensham, Gateshead on-Tyne. 
Winkworth, Mrs., Holly Lodge, Campden Hill, W. 
Wiseman, Rev. Henry John, Scrivelby Rectory, Horncastle. 
Wood, Rev. W. S., Ufford Rectory, Stamford. 
Woodhouse, Prof. W. J., 7he Uniuersity, Sydney, N.S.W. 
tWoods, Rev. H. C., D.D., Little Gaddesden Rectory, Berkhampstead. 
Woodward, A. M., Magdalen College, Oxford. 
Woodward, Prof. W. H., University College, Liverpool. 
Wright, F. A., Mili Hill School, Mill Hill, N.W. 


= 


Wright, Prof. John Henry, 
+Wright, W. Aldis, Vice-Master, sig Ca 
+Wyndham, Rev. secrete Mary ofthe ls, Westmor 
tWyse, W., Trinily College, Cambridge. τς ἣν since ett ἢ 

Yates, Rev. S. A. Thompson, 43, a eae Gardens, W. No Fiat sats 

Yorke, V. W., Forthampton Court, Tewkesbury, . “5 τ 
Young, Sir George, Charity Commission, Whitehall, S.W~ ἼΩΝ as ee 
Young, William Stewart, 20, Montagu Square, W. ΝΥ CE ee 


+Yule, Miss Amy F., Zarradale House, Ross-shire, Scotland, τας ἄς ie, ΩΣ 
“SL Sacto 
7 ΘΝ 
’ F ὙΣ, , 
so ae 
4 
ἢ - ig κ γὴ 
& : “9 
‘. » “- a ᾿ 


© - ἢ 
Ξ ᾿ ' 2 
- Φ .ν ~ - Σ ‘ ἢ 
é Ε =i 
a ¢ a 2 
i ~@ τ νὰ 
ς » on = 
Peat te ‘ Ε ὃν. | 
. τ᾿ 
- ἃ -- Γ 
‘ : Peete 2 
° ~ ΄ - « P 
ἐν Ἄρα τὸν Σ .} fa 
“Ὁ ἀπ 
ave 
a «- -ν 
» . \ - ᾿ 
«ἰοὺς Uy 
- ~ & mais 
» ~ aus as” Δ δ΄ 
pra . » FE a a a - Se " - ‘ 
vee «εὖ ͵ pairs ae 5 BIA ὁ WES στ goers te ive E 
~~ . ‘ . 
2 i «ἢ - » oy > δ ΟΝ τε 
ss i 2-8 Gr ὑπ νὸν gh Otaties 25s pune ας baa tees ae 
ΡΨ . - * ἀν 
ee A mi Ales LAS as Pra’ bh pe it ᾿ 
a 5 3 : νυ ay ' 
ae evke ee Sy RE ἣν pat Pal < 


κι. te “ ἌΝΩ 
4 1... “= Woy 
tt real 


ἊΝ 
apna id aed a 
Ie Vgentieste So ani οὐρα ναας 


ho » 

«ἢ Γι sr 
7 tl ΐ i 6g ιν 
att, a oe tor 9 

a ἊΝ 5 - 
— ae fe 


Ξ xxiii 


LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS TO THE JOURNAL OF HELLENIC 
STUDIES. 


The University Library, Aderdeen., 
The University College of Wales, Aderystwith, 
The University Library, Adelaide, S. Australia, 
The Bibliothéque Nationale de Gréce, A “hens. 
The American School of Archzology, Athens. 
The Carnegie Free Library, A//egheny, Pa., U.S.A. 
The Amherst College Library, Amherst, Mass., U.S.A. 
The Andover Theological Seminary, Andover, Mass., U.S.A. 
The Peabody Institute, Baltimore, U.S.A. - 
The Johns Hopkins Library, Baltimore. 
The Enoch Pratt Library, Baltimore, 
The University Library, Berkeley, California. 
The Royal Museum Library, Ber/in. 
The Royal Library, Berlin. 
The Central Free Library, Ratcliffe Place, Birmingham (A. Capel Shaw, Esq.). 
The University of Birmingham, Birmingham. 
The Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Mass, U.S.A. 
The Public Library, Boston, U.S.A. 
The Bowdoin College Library, Brunswick, Maine, U.S.A. 
The University Library, Bres/au. 
The Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences, Brooklyn, U.S.A. 
The Bryn Mawr College Library, Bryn Mawr, Pa., U.S.A. 
The Stanford University Library, California, U.S.A. 
The Library of Clifton College, C/i/ton, Bristol. 
The Antiken Cabinet des Ungar. National Museum, iets ἃ 
+The University Library, Cambdridge. 
The Library of Trinity College, Camébridge. 
{ The Library of Trinity Hall, Cambridge. 
The Library of St. John’s College, Caméridge. 
The Library of King’s College, Cambridge. 
The FitzWilliam Archaeological Museum, Cambridge. 
The Girton College Library, Cambridge. 
The Harvard College Library, Cambridge, Mass., U.S.A. 
The University College of South Wales, (γα: 
The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, /ilinots. 
The Lewis Institute, Chicago, ///inois. 
The University Library, Christiania, Norway. 
The Library of Canterbury College, Christchurch, N.Z. 
The Public Library, Cincinnati, U.S.A. 
The University Library, Cincinnati, U.S.A. 
The University of Colorado, Colorado, U.S.A. 
The University Library of State of Missouri, Co/umbia, Missourt, U.S.A. 
The University of Czernowitz, Czernowitz, Austria-Hungary. 
The Public Library, De/rozt, U.S.A. 
The Royal Museum of Casts, Dresden. 
+The Library of Trinity College, Dud/in. 
The National Library of Ireland, Dudiin. 
The King’s Inns Library, Duddin. 
The Royal Irish Academy, Dudiin. ὦ 
_ The University College, Dundee. 
The Durham Cathedral Library, Durham. 


τ ἀπ λα α Library, Edinburgh. 


χχχὶν 


The Sellar and Goodhart Library, University, Edinburgh. 

The Royal Holloway College, Egham, Surrey. 

The Library of St. Mary’s College, Emmitsburg, Maryland, U. S.A. 
The University Library, Zr/angen. 

The University Library, Freiburg im Baden (Prof. Stemp). 

The Philologische Seminar, Giessen. 

The University Library, Glasgow. 

The Library of Charterhouse School, Godalming. 

The University Library, Gottingen. 

The Royal University Library, Griefswa/d. 

The University Library, a//e. 

The Dartmouth College Library, Hanover, U.S.A. 

The School Library, Harrow, N.W. 

The University Library, Hetdelburg (Dr. Zangemeister). 

The Hull Public Libraries, Hu//. ᾿ 

The State University of Iowa, Jowa, U.S.A. 

The Cornell University Library, /thaca, N.Y. 

The University Library, Jena. 

The Royal and University Library, Konigsberg. 

The University of Kansas, Lawrence, U.S.A. 

The Leeds Library, Commercial Street, Leeds. 

The Public Library, Leeds. 

The University Library, 3, Rue Jean Bart, Lille. 

The Free Library, Lzverfool. 

The Society of Antiquaries, Burlington House, London, W. 
+The British Museum, London, W.C. 

The Department of Greek and Roman Antiquites, British Museum, London, W.C. 
The Athenaeum Club, Pa// Mall, London, S.W. 

The Burlington Fine Arts Club, Savile Row, London, W. 

The Chelsea Public Library, Manresa Road, Chelsea, London, S.W. 
The Library of St. Paul’s School, West Kensington, London, W. 
The London Library, SZ. /ames’s Square, Lond, S.W. 

The Reform Club, Pall Mall, London, S.W. 

The Royal Institution, A/éemarle Street, London, W. 

The Royal Societies Club, 63, S¢. James’s Street, S.W. 

The Library, Westminster School, London, S.W. 

The Oxford and Cambridge Club, c/o Messrs. Harrison and Sons, 59, Pall Mall, W. 
The Foreign Architectural Book Society (T. H. Watson, Esq.), 9, Mottingham Place, W. 
The Sion College Library, Victoria Embankment, London, E.C. 
The City Library, Lowell, Mass. U.S.A. 

The Bibliothéque Universitaire, Palais St, Pierre, Lyons. 

The Whitworth Institute, anchester. 

The Chetham’s Library, Hunts Bank, Manchester. 

The Grammar School, Manchester. 

The Owens College, Manchester. 

The Royal University Library, Marburg. 

The Public Library, I/e/bourne, Victoria (c/o Messrs. Melville, Mullen and Co.). 
The Library of the University of Milan, Wz/an, 

The Ko6nigliche Paulinische Bibliothek, Munster, 7. W. 

The Royal Library, Munich. 

The Archeological Seminary, Munich. 

The Free Public Library, Vewark, New Jersey, U.S.A. 

The Library of Yale College, Newhaven, U.S.A. 

The Free Public Library, Jersey City, New Jersey, U.S.A. 

The Public Library, Wew York, U.S.A. 

The New York State Library, A/bany, New York. 

The Library of Columbia University, Mew York. 

The Hamilton College Library, C/inton, New York. 


“νυ 


—_— . Δουναινω, 


— .»ν»-. 


- 
- * 


. XXXV 

The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. 

The Library of the College of the City of New York, Mew York. 
tThe Bodleian Library, Ozford. 

The Junior Library, Corpus Christi College, Oxford. 

The Library of All Souls College, Oxford. 

The Library of Worcester College, Oxford. 

The Library of Christ Church, Oxford. 

The Library of Exeter College, Oxford. 

The Library of St. John’s College, Oxford. 

The Library of New College, Oxford. 

The Library of Oriel College, Oxford. 

The Library of Queen’s College, Oxford. 

The Library of Trinity College, Oxford. 

The Library of Lincoln College, Oxford. 

The Union Society, Oxford. 

The University Galleries, Oxford. 

The Lake Erie College, Paiusville, Ohiv, U.S.A. 

The Bibliothéque de l'Institut de France, Paris. 

The Bibliothéque de l Université de France, Paris. 

The Bibliothéque des Musées Nationaux, Paris. 

The Bibliothéque Nationale de Paris, Paris. 

The Ecole Normale Supérieur, Pars. 

The Library Company, Philadelphia. 

The Library of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa., U.S.A. 
The Carnegie Library, Pittsburg, Pa., U.S.A. 

The Vassar Library, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. 

The Archaeological Seminary, 7he University, Prague (Dr. Wilhelm Klein). 
The University Library, Prague. 

The Bibliothéque de l'Université, Rennes. 

The American School of Classical Studies, 5, Via Vincenza, Rome. 
The University Library, St. Andrews, N.B. 

The Mount Holyoke College, South Hadley, Mass., U.S.A. 

The Royal Library, Stockholm. 

The Archeological Museum, 7he University, Strassburg (Prof. Michaelis). 
The Imperial University and National Library, Strassburg. 

The Free Library, Sydney, New South Wales. 

The University Library, Syracuse, New York. 

The University Library, Zoronto. 

The Universitats Bibliothek, 7%dingen. 

The Library of the University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A. 
The Library of Congress, Washington, U.S.A. 

The Boys Library, Eton College, Windsor. 

The Biblicthéque Publique, Winterthur (Dr. Imhoof-Blumer). 
The Free Library, Worcester, Mass., U.S.A. 

The Williams College Library, Wi//iamstown, Mass., U.S.A. 

The Kunstgeschichtliches Museum der Universitat, Wiirzburg. 


{Libraries claiming copies under the Copyright Act. 


ΧΧΧΥΪ ᾿ 


LIST OF JOURNALS, ἃς, RECEIVED IN? EXCHANGE FOR THE 


JOURNAL OF.HELLENIC STUDIES, ae 


American Journal of Archzology (Miss Mary H, Buckingham, Wedlesley Hills, 
Mass., U.S.A.). 
Analecta Ballandiana, Société des Bollandistes, 14, Rue des Ursulines, Brusetias 


Annales of Cairo Museum, Cazvo. — 


Annual of the British School at Athens. 

Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique (published by the French School at A chens). 

Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma (Prof. Gatti, Museo 
Capitolino, Rome). 5 

Ephemeris Archaiologike, A¢hens. 

Jahrbuch of German Imperial Archaeological Institute, Corneliusstrasse No. a, IL, 
Berlin, 


Jahreshefte des Osterreichischen Archiologischen Institutes, Tiirkenstrasse, 4, Vienna. ἢ 


Journal of the Anthropological Institute, Hanover Square. 

Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects, 9, Conduit Street, W. 

Journal International d’Archéologie Numismatique (M. J. N. Svoronos, inate 
National, Athens). 

Mélanges d’Histoire et d’Archéologie, published by the French School at Rome. 

Mittheilungen of the German Imperial Archaeological Institute at Athens, 

Mittheilungen of the German Imperial Archaeological Institute at Rome. 

Mnemosyne (c/o Mr. E. J. Brill), Leiden, Holland. 

Neue Jahrbiicher (c/o Dr. J. Ilberg), Rosenthalgasse 3, I1., Letpzig. 

Numismatic Chronicle, 22, A/éemarle Street. 


Philologus. Zeitschrift fiir das klassische Altertum (c/o Dietrich’sche Verlags- ἡ 


Buchhandlung, Go¢tingen). 

Praktika of the Athenian Archaeological Society, Athens. 

Proceedings of the Hellenic Philological Syllogos, Constantinople. 

Publications of the Imperial Archaelogical Commission, Sz. Petersburg, 

Revue Archéologique, Paris (per M. Georges Perrot, 45, rue a Ulm). 

Revue des Etudes Grecques, Publication Trimestrielle de I’Association pour l’En- 
couragement des Etudes Grecques en France, Paris, 

Transactions of the Cambridge Philological Society and Journal of Philology. 


SESSION 1902-1903. 


THE First General Meeting was held in the rooms of the Society of 
Antiquaries at Burlington House on Tuesday, Nov. 4, 1902, Mr. Douglas 
Freshfield, Treasurer, in the chair. 

Mr. Jay Hambidge read a paper on ‘ The Natural Basis of Form in Greek 
Art,’ with especial reference to the Parthenon. The investigation of the sym- 
metrical forms found in Nature, both organic and inorganic, led to the dis- 
covery that (allowing for modifications of growth) a certain principle of 
proportion is rigidly persistent throughout. The examination of the pro- 
portions of crystals, and of the proportions and outlines of living forms, 
such as the flower of the grape, diatoms, radiolaria, butterflies (these being 
but a few instances out of a very large number), shows that the proportions 
and curves involved in these forms may be analysed by (1) a primary series of 
circles which stand to each other in a binary relation (1: 2:4: 8, &c.), 
combined with (2) a secondary series of circles derived by using as radii the 
sides of the triangles, squares, pentagons, or hexagons inscribed in the 
circles of the primary series. The proportions of symmetrical natural 
objects can all be expressed in terms of circles standing to each other in 
this relation, and the curved outlines of Nature can be analysed by a series 

By of osculating circles which are similarly related. The same binary system, 
it was shown, can be used to analyse the proportions and curves of the 
Parthenon, down to the minutest detail. The use of this principle involves 
no abstruse knowledge of mathematics, but requires only the simplest 
geometrical methods. On this system, with a string and a stick anda 
sanded floor, proportions can be worked out which, if expressed arithmetic- 
ally, would involve incommensurable quantities. The inference is that the 

_. Greek architect used some simple geometrical system of this kind, and refined 

his curves by means of circles related to each other on the system already 
described. He was thus unconsciously following the principle on which 
Nature builds up her symmetrical forms; and the investigation of the 
proportions and outlines of numerous other works of art, such as Greek 

* tig shows that the works of the best period always approximate most 

to the same principle. The Parthenon is only the most striking 

ΝΥ Beetle instance of the fact that the beautiful in art involves adherence 

(pr y unconscious) to the same law as underlies the beautiful in 


\ discussion followed, in which Mr. Penrose, Sir John Evans, 
dad 


XXXVili 


Mr. H. H. Statham, Mr. G. F. Hill and Prof. W. C. F. Anderson took part; 
and Mr. Hambidge replied to the points raised. 


The Second General Meeting was held at Burlington House on Feb. 
24, 1903, Prof. Percy Gardner, V.P., in the chair. 

Miss H. L. Lorimer read a paper on ‘The Ancient Greek Cart.’ 
(7.1.5. Vol. xxiii. p. 132). The paper was illustrated by lantern-slides.— 
A discussion followed, in which the Chairman, Prof. Ernest Gardner, 
Mr. A. G. Bather, and others took part. 


The Third General Meeting was held at Burlington House on May 5, 
1903, Sir R. Jebb, President, in the chair. 

Dr. Waldstein read a paper on the bronze found off Cerigo. Two 
years ago, in the Monthly Review, Dr. Waldstein published an article in 
which, on the evidence of photographs of the upper part of the bronze 
found in the sea off Cerigo, he considered that the statue probably 
represented a Hermes Paregoros and was of the Praxitelean style of 
sculpture. Since then the statue had been completely restored by the 
French sculptor M. André, and M. Cavvadias had kindly sent a number 
of different views of the whole statue. In the light of this new evidence 
Dr. Waldstein reconsidered the question of the subject as well as the style 
of the statue. The front view, showing the two middle fingers of the 
upraised hand bent forward on the same level, made his interpretation 
of this attitude as that of an orator bidding silence before he began to 
speak less secure. On the other hand, it seemed to him impossible that 
the statue represented an athlete about to throw—or who had just thrown 
—a ball. Nor was it likely that the sculptor would have finished off the 
hand in all details and then inserted a round object. It would be much 
easier to cast the hand holding the object at once. Still the round object 
might have been of some other material, such as an apple, and thus it 
was not impossible that the figure might have held an apple as Paris, 
or the hair of the head of Medusa (Perseus), or the purse 
of Hermes. On the whole, it seemed to him most probable that the 
hand was merely raised in gesture, and that the statue represented Hermes 
as an orator. As to the style, we must remember that Pliny records that 
par haesttatio est whether two separate groups were by Scopas or Praxiteles ; 
and it cannot thus appear extraordinary that, after he had been able to 
study the several photographs of the fully restored statue, he should now 
change from Praxiteles to Scopas. On the other hand, not having 
examined the statue itself, he could not be positive as to its merit in all 
details, and whether we might attribute the work to the hand of the master 
himself or his followers. But when we compare the statue with works of 
Praxiteles, such as the ‘ Hermes’ (which the lecturer did throughout by 
means of lantern-slides), we at once see that the proportions of the body 
are not those of the ‘Hermes,’ with its longer torso and the different 


ΧΧΧΙΧ 


modelling of the muscles. It is in this respect nearer to the "Αροχγο- 
menos’ of Lysippus, only that here again the longer legs, the greater slim- 
ness, and the smaller head, of which the ancients speak as distinctive 
_ characteristics of that artist, distinguish it from the Cerigo bronze. The 
lecturer then proceeded to show the difference in the treatment of the 
heads of the bronze and the Praxitelean and Lysippean statues, and 
demonstrated how the distinctive characteristics of Scopasian heads, as 
shown by Dr. Graef and others, and as maintained by himself for many 
years, were to be found in a marked manner in this Cerigo statue. He 
threw on the screen heads mentioned’ by Dr. Graef in various museums 
and added to them some bronzes at Naples, at Florence, and elsewhere, 
and especially dwelt upon the characteristic treatment of the eye and 
forehead, and the peculiar way the hair seemed to rise out of the forehead. 
Lastly he showed how in the ‘ Hercules’ of Lansdowne House—in the body 
and especially in the head—the same Scopasian characteristics were 
manifest, and that the famous intaglio of Hercules by Cneius in the 
British Museum was a replica of the same ‘Hercules,’ all manifesting 
the same style as the bronze from Cerigo.—A discussion followed, in 
which Dr. Rendall, Mr. G. F. Hill, Mr. Stannus, and others took part. 


The Annual Meeting took place at Burlington House on June 30, 
1903, Sir Richard Jebb, President, in the chair. 

The Hon. Secretary (Mr. George Macmillan) read the following Report 
on the part of the Council :— 


The Council have pleasure in reporting that the 24th Session of the 
Society has been one of healthy progress in every department. The 
meetings at Burlington House have been well attended and, as will 
appear, the Society has been active in publication, and in assisting 
exploration. 

A further grant of £100 has been made to the Cretan Exploration 
Fund by the help of which Mr. Evans has continued his brilliant. dis- 
coveries at Cnossus, while help has also been given by that Fund to 
excavations on the site of Palaikastro conducted by Mr. Bosanquet 
as Director of the British School at Athens. An important article by 
Mr. Duncan Mackenzie on the Pottery of Cnossus has appeared in the 
᾿ς last number (xxiii. 1) of the Society’s Journal and full accounts of recent 
_ discoveries at Cnossus, Praesus, and Palaikastro appear in the new number 
of the Annual of the British School at Athens which has just been issued. 

The annual grant of £100 to the British School at Athens has been 
_ renewed for a further period of three years, and members will be glad 
is ‘to know that the School has never been in a healthier condition than 
now. As the Society now makes a small grant to the British School at 
Rom _members will be interested to hear that the School, though still 


financial support, is doing good work. A first volume of Papers 
hed last year and has been well received. 
ΜΝ d2 


xl 


A grant of £25 has been made to Mr. D. G. Hogarth to assist him 
in exploring Greek sites in the northern portion of the Egyptian Delta. 
It is hoped that some account of his results may appear in the Journal. 

The contents of the twenty-second volume of the Journal are sufficient 
evidence of the value of the Society’s work in this field. In connexion 
with the Journal two important steps have been taken during the past 
session. In the first place, the Editorial Committee, in co-operation with 
the Consultative Committee, have drawn up a scheme for the transliteration 
of Greek names in the Journal, with a view to securing a uniform system 
for the guidance of contributors. This scheme, which was the result of 
careful deliberation, is somewhat of the nature of a compromise, but it is 
hoped that it will prove satisfactory in working. In the second place it 
has been decided to add a bibliographical section to the Journal, con- 
taining short accounts by experts of the most important publications in 
every branch of Hellenic study. 

The Facsimile of the Codex Venetus of Aristophanes, referred to in 
last year’s Report, has now been issued at the joint cost of the Society 
and of the Archaeological Institute of America. Two hundred copies 
were issued at the price of £6 6s. bound in morocco, or £6 in a portfolio. 
Nearly half the Edition has been taken up in Europe and America, and 
it is hoped that the remainder will be subscribed for in due course so that 
the sum of about 4200 which has been advanced by the Society may be 
recovered. It is generally admitted that the Facsimile, with the admirable 
palaeographical Introduction by Mr. T. W. Allen, is thoroughly creditable 
to the two Societies concerned. 

Another publication for which the Society has made itself responsible, 
that of the volume recording the results of the excavations undertaken 
by the British School at Athens at Phylakopiin the island of Melos, has 
made steady progress during the past session and will probably appear 
before the end of the year. The heaviest part of the expense, that of the 
illustrations, amounting to about 4160, has already been met, and the cost of 
the letterpress will be comparatively small. As stated in previous Reports, 
this volume will be issued to members at about cost price, and it is 
earnestly hoped that enough copies will be bought by members and at a 
higher price by the outside public to secure the Society against financial 
loss, 

Another item of expenditure which has been incurred during the past 
year has been the printing of the Catalogue of the Society’s Library. 
Unfortunately the expense—about £75—has been considerably greater than 
was anticipated, and had it been foreseen the Council might have decided to 
make a small charge for it even to members. The existence of such a 
‘Catalogue, however, should add much to the usefulness of the Library, and 
it is hoped that there may bea small sale for it outside the Society. To 
members elected after the current Session the Catalogue will be supplied at 
_2s.net. The price to outsiders has been fixed at 3s. net. 

An important change in the management of the Library bids been 


ΧΙ 


made during the past year. Miss Johnson, who had done good service as 
Assistant Librarian for seven years, resigned her post at the end of the 
year, and the Council, on the recommendation of the Library Committee, 
decided to engage at a higher salary the services of a trained archaeologist, 
with some practical knowledge of photography and lantern slides. Steps 
were taken to advertise the post at the Universities and elsewhere, and 
several good candidates presented themselves. In the end a member of 
the Society, Mr. J. ff. Baker-Penoyre, with quite exceptional qualifications, 
was appointed and has held office, as Librarian, since Christmas. Members 
who use the Library must already have felt the great advantage of being 
able to appeal to a Librarian with competent knowledge of the contents of 
the Library, and of the use of Lantern Slides. 


Library Report. 


During the past year 250 visits are recorded to have been made to the 
Library, compared with 343 in 1901-2, and 236 in 1900-1. The number 
of members using the Library was 65 compared with 66 and 81. The 
number of volumes borrowed was 211 compared with 247 and 199. 

In the course of the spring a thorough revision of the arrangement of 
| the Library was undertaken. Some parts had become seriously congested, 
and the classification was imperfect. Additional shelves have now been 
added, the books have been spaced out, as far as the size of the room 
allows, the classification has been improved and subject labels have been 
fixed on the shelves. It is estimated that there is now space for four years’ 
growth. 
The issue of the catalogue, to which reference is made elsewhere, 
should increase the usefulness of the Library to members at a distance. 
It is hoped that the improved shelf arrangement will facilitate research at 
| the Library itself. 
| Three new periodicals have been added to the list, namely the 
Harvard Studies, the Papers of the British School at Rome, and Archiv fir 
Stenographie. Ninety-one new books have been added, among which the 
following deserve special mention :— 


Aristophanes. Facsimile of Codex Venetus, issued by the Hellenic 
Society in co-operation with the Archaeological Institute of 
America. 

Burlington Fine Arts Club. Catalogue of objects of Greek Ceramic 
Art (1888). Illustrated copy on Japanese paper. 

Kaibel. Inscriptiones Graecae Siciliae et Italiae. 

Wilcken. Griechische Ostraka aus Aegypten und Nubien. 

Blouet. 1, Expédition Scientifique de Morée. 


The collection of Classical authors has been further strengthened by 
the addition of twenty-five Teubner texts. 


xiii 


Gifts of books have been received from the Archaeological Institute of 
America, the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press, the Delegates of 


the Clarendon Press, the Delegates of the Bodleian Library, the Trustees 


of the British Museum, the University of Colorado, and the University of 
Missouri. The following authors have presented copies of their works : 
Mr. A. 5. Arbanitopoulos, Mr. F. 5. Benson, Prof. 5. H. Butcher, Mr. N. P. 
Eleutheriades, Prof. E. A. Gardner, Dr. E. Petersen, Mr. A. H. Smith, and 
Prof. U. von Wilamowitz-Mollendorf. Miscellaneous books have been 
presented by Mr. G. F. Hill, Mr. Talfourd Ely, the Hon. Treasurer, and 
the Librarian. 


Photographic Collection. 


In the course of the past six months the whole of the Photographic 
collection has been thoroughly revised by the -newly appointed Librarian, 
and considerably enlarged by donations and occasional purchases: and 
several improvements have been introduced in its administrative routine, 
which it is believed will increase still further its usefulness to the members 
of the Society. 

A. The Reference Collection of Photographs, a \arge part of which has 
been accumulated in bound volumes, the contents of which frequently 
overlapped one another, has now been entirely transferred to uniform card 
mounts, which are arranged, like the library card-catalogue, in uniform 
compartments, and are consequently easy of access. It is further intended 
to reclassify the whole collection in order of subjects, in the course of the 
vacation, and thus effect further economy of time and trouble in the use 
of a collection which is probably already one of the largest photographic 
records of Hellenic monuments and sites. A comprehensive index of the 
whole collection is in preparation, and sections of it are made available 
for consultation in the Library as soon as they are ready. 

B. The Loan Collection of Photographs has been allowed to develop 
more slowly, in proportion as time and expenditure seemed to be more 
profitably concentrated on the Collection of Slides (see C. below). Dupli- 
cate photographs are, however, set aside as occasion offers, and are put 
at the disposal of lecturers and students in the same manner as are the 
slides and the library books. 

C. The Loan Collection of Slides still grows rapidly, and is at last 
_becoming more widely known. During the past year more than 1,300 
slides have been lent to members ; and more than 500 have been made for 
sale from the Society’s negatives. A number of fresh slides and negatives 
have been added to the collection ; a number of the less adequate slides 
are being replaced by slides made from: the finer or more instructive nega- 
tives which have been placed in recent years at the Society’s disposal, and 
greater attention is being paid than was possible formerly to the remedy 
of the wear and tear which results from more frequent use. In spite, 


een) ὦ ὰ 


xliii 


however, of these fresh causes of expenditure, the collection still pays its 
way. In fact, the only serious obstacle to very wide extension of its 
usefulness is the want of an adequate printed catalogue. The stock of 
separate copies of the original catalogue of 1897 and of the supplementary 
list of 1900 is practically exhausted ; a second supplementary list issued 
last autumn in Vol. xxii of the Journal did little more than report recent 
accessions, and reformulate the whole contents of one or two sections 
where the size of the supplement exceeded that of the original list ; and 
the inconvenience of having to consult three separate lists in different 
volumes of the Journal is a serious one. The question of how these evils 
can best be remedied is now under consideration. 

D. The Collection of Photographic Negatives has grown in a similar 
proportion: and it has been found possible at last to compile out of the 
numerous separate negative-lists which have been accumulating since the 
collection was instituted a single negative-register of between 4,000 and 
5,000 negatives. 

In the compilation of this register, in the complete revision of the 
whole of the Society’s material, and, above all, in maintaining undisturbed 
the daily routine of the supply and loan of slides during the period of 
investigation and readjustment, the Society owes a special debt of gratitude 
to its Librarian, Mr. Baker-Penoyre, who has given up a large part of his 
leisure to clear off arrears and to start the collection as from September 
next on a more simple and expansible system. 


The Society has been officially represented at two important functions 
during the past year. In October the President and Hon. Secretary 
attended the celebration at Oxford of the Tercentenary of the Bodleian 
Library, and presented a*-Latin address which was printed in the last 
volume of the Journal. In April the President represented the Society at 
the Historical Congress in Rome. 

Among losses sustained by death during the past year special mention 
is due to Mr. F. C. Penrose, the eminent architect, who had served on the 
Council since the foundation of the Society, and had for many years held 
the office of Vice-President. All who have had the pleasure of working 
with Mr. Penrose during these twenty-four years will recognise how much 
the Society owes to his constant interest in all the objects with which it is 
concerned. We have also to record the lamented death of Mr. Stephen 
Spring Rice, C.B., one of the Auditors of the Society. Mr. George Lillie 
Craik was provisionally appointed in his place and is to-day nominated for 
election. 

In June of next year the Society will have completed the twenty-fifth 
year of its existence, the inaugural meeting having been held at Free- 
‘masons’ Tavern on June 19; 879. The Council are of opinion that the 
occasion should be celebrated, and have already begun to consider the 

best steps to be taken in the matter. Full particulars will be announced 


xliv 


Finance. 


The Balance Sheet shows the present financial position of the Society. 
Ordinary receipts during the year were £1079, against £1022 during the 
financial year 1901-2. The receipts from subscriptions, including arrears, 
amount to £659, against £641, and receipts from libraries, and for. the 
purchase of back volumes £202, against £185. Entrance fees to the value 
of £50 have been received. Life subscriptions amounting to £94, donations 
43, and for lantern slides £26 have also been received. 

The ordinary expenditure for the year amounts to £812 against £665. 
Payments for rent £80, insurance £15, are the same as in the preceding 
year; the salaries owing to the appointment of a new Librarian have 
risen to 468. Sundry printing, postage, and stationery accounts show 
an increase of £30; the cost of purchases for the Library shows £89 
against £82 and of lantern slides £35 against £17. The net cost of the 
Journal, Vol. XXII, amounts to £454 against £367. The usual grant of 
£100 was made to the British School at Athens, £25 to the British School 
at Rome, £25 to Mr. Hogarth for the Egyptian Delta, and £100 to the 
Cretan Exploration Fund. The balance carried forward at the close of 
the year under review amounts to £56 against £409 at the end of the 
previous financial year. There is also a credit balance of £417 on the 
Aristophanes Facsimile account. 

The expenditure on the facsimile of the Codex Venetus of Aristo- 
phanes is shown in a separate account. The amount advanced by the 
Society is £210. £160 has been paid towards the cost of the Phylakopi 
volume. 

Eighty-five new members have been elected during the year, while 
27 have been lost by death or resignation. The present total of subscribing 
members is 819, and of honorary members 25. 

Seven new libraries have joined the list of subscribers, making the 
number at the present time 150, or with the five public libraries 155. 


Conclusion. 


In conclusion, the Council feel that the Society may congratulate itself 
on a Session of varied activity and substantial progress. The comparatively 
small balance in hand is accounted for by unusual expenditure, but some 
part of this will certainly be recovered by sales of the Aristophanes 
Facsimile and of the volume on Phylakopi. There has been a very marked 
increase in the number of members and it may be suggested that special 
efforts should be made during the coming year to bring in still more. 
There could be no more appropriate way of celebrating the Society’s 
twenty-fifth year than by raising the number of mémbers from 800 to 1,000. 
The Society might then enter upon a new epoch of existence in a 


EE eS ee 


Ξ 


thoroughly sound financial condition, and so be able to meet fully the 


Study in all its branches. 


+ 


In moving the adoption of the Report the President said :— 


In moving the adoption of the Report which has just been read, it is in 
“accordance with our custom that I should say a few words on some of the 
more noteworthy incidents relating to Hellenic studies which have occurred 
since our last Annual Meeting. Such.a retrospect can, of course, make no 
claim to completeness ; and the notice given to each topic must needs be 
oF very brief. But a rapid survey, however imperfect, is perhaps not wholly 
useless, if it serves as a reminder of the varied work which has been in 
progress. | 

It is a remarkable fact that each of the more important metrical texts 
found in Egypt during the last few years illustrates a poetical type of 
which no example was previously known to us. The mimes of Herondas 
stand alone in their class. So also do these six odes of Bacchylides, form- 
ing the second division-of the recovered series, which- in later antiquity 
passed under the general name of dithyrambs. A third instance is now 
supplied by a long fragment from a poem Ly Timotheus of Miletus, who 
flourished about 400 B.c. This poem was of the very old kind called νόμος, 
nome ; a term which originally meant, probably, a custom, use, or mode in 
singing. The nome was a sacred solo in honour of some god, especially of 
Apollo. Terpander of Lesbos, in the early part of the seventh century, who 
developed the music of the cithara, was famous for his κιθαρῳδικοὶ νόμοι--- 
solos, chiefly, but not exclusively, in hexameter verse, sung to the cithara. 


1 Timotheus, who, like Terpander, was primarily a musician, gave a new 
popularity to the citharodic nome, which, in his hands, took a more artificial 
a and also a more popular form, connected with his innovations in music. 


The papyrus containing this fragment was discovered near Memphis early 

in 1902. The objects found along with it are referred by archaeologists to 

a date not much later than 350 B.c. The writing of the papyrus itself may, 

_ in Mr. Kenyon’s judgment, be referred to the same period ; it cannot in 

any case be later than the early part of the third century. This papyrus 

- is therefore the oldest extant Greek MS. ; being clearly of an earlier type 

than the Flinders Petrie Phaedo and Antiope, which had previously stood 

first in age. As edited by Prof. von Wilamowitz-Mollendorf, the text 

consists of 253 verses, forming the middle part and the end of a citharodic 

nome. Unfortunately there is no trace of the musical notation. The 

metre is lyric, in short verses and free rhythms, evidently determined by 

the music. A certain analogy to the general metrical character may be 
’ d in some lyrics of Euripides. 

1e poem describes a naval victory of Greeks over Persians, which 

o other than that of Salamis; there are references to the Persian 


ὙΠ ( 


ying 
Pe. 
> @€e 


increasing demands made upon its resources for the promotion of Hellenic. 


the whole scene. The fragment belongs, then, to one — 


xlvi 


of the most celebrated nomes of Timotheus—that entitled the Persae, 
which, as Plutarch shows, was popular at the time when Agesilaus com- 
manded in Asia Minor, and remained in favour down at least to the days 
of Philopoemen. While the form of the whole is lyric, the central part of 
the nome is epic in treatment, being a narrative of the sea-fight, inter- 
spersed, in epic fashion, with speeches. Thus an Asiatic chief, who is 
drowning, cries aloud to the cruel sea—‘ Bold as thou art, thou once 
hadst thy neck in a hempen noose’ (ἐμ wédqg...dcvodér@),—alluding to the 
bridge of boats which Xerxes threw across the Hellespont ;—and then, 
with his dying breath, predicts a final triumph for his master. A very 
curious feature of this nome is the introduction οἵ ἃ distinctly comic element. 
After the battle, a Phrygian, taken prisoner by the Greeks, pleads for his 
life in bad Greek,—‘ interweaving the speech of Hellas,’ as the poet says, 
‘with that of Asia.” Among other solecisms, he says épyw instead of 
ἔρχομαι, and makes Artemis masculine, calling her ἐμὸς μέγας θεός. This 
quaint counterpart to the Scythian in Aristophanes shows how far Timo- 
theus was prepared to go in appealing to the popular taste. The old nome, 
as Terpander knew it, was not only religious, but solemn. 

As to the diction of the fragment, it is the traditional lyric language 
in a degenerate phase, marked by extremeartificialism. It was Timotheus 
who described a shield as ‘the cup of Ares,’ and metaphors of that nature 
occur ; also many uncouth compound words. One further point of interest 
should be noted. The fragment illustrates the structure of a νόμος. We 
knew before that the three principal parts were called ἀρχή, ὀμφαλός and 
σφραγίς. Here the ἀρχή is wanting ; the central part, the ὀμφαλός, is the 
story of the battle ; and the σφραγίς consists of the last thirty-eight verses, 
in which the poet speaks of himself by name. He sets his seal on his 
work, marking it as his own. ‘Apollo be gracious to me, he says; ‘the 
great Spartan folk reproach me with dishonouring the old music by new 
fashions of song. And then he @xplains, in effect, that his quarrel is only 
with the dad exponents of the old school (μουσοπαλαιολύμας). He, 
Timotheus of Miletus, is in the true line of Orpheus and Terpander. But 
Terpander had only ten strings to his cithara, and he has eleven. 

The German editor conjectures that Timotheus sang this νόμος to the 
cithara, about 397 B.C., at the Panionia, the festival of the twelve Ionian 
cities, held on the promontory of Mycale. The editor seems to be wrong, 
however, in supposing that it was a solo throughout. Probably the per- 
formance of the central portion was, in part at least, choral. This would 
suit, for instance, the verses describing the triumphal dances (χορείαις) of 
the Greeks after their victory (vv. 213 f.): and, according to tradition, the 
most distinctive innovation of Timotheus was to make the nome 
choral instead of simply monodic. Sparta was then supreme in 
Hellas, and it was the interest of the Asiatic Greeks to encourage the 
Spartans in their warfare with the Persian satraps. Not a single proper 
name occurs in the narrative of the sea-fight. Salamis is tacitly treated as 
a Hellenic rather than an Athenian victory. It cannot be said that the 


xl vii 


new fragment has much literary or poetical value. But for the history of 
the later classical poetry it is indeed a curious document. 

Reference has been made in the Report to the collotype Facsimile of 
the Codex Venetus (Marcianus 474) of Aristophanes, published jointly by 
the Archaeological Institute of America and our Society. It may be well 
to add a brief statement of the reasons why the Codex Venetus was 
chosen for reproduction in preference to the Codex Ravennas. The 
Venice MS. dates from about the middle of the eleventh century, and 
contains only seven plays (Plutus, Clouds, Frogs, Knights, Birds, Peace, 
_ Wasps). The Ravenna MS. is somewhat older ; it contains all the eleven 

plays; and it has hitherto been generally regarded as the best authority. 
But its text has twice been collated and published ; and an accurate edition 
4 of its Scholia is also available. The Venice MS., on the other hand, has 
Ἂ received comparatively slight attention. That was one reason for selecting 
1 it. But another and yet stronger ground was the great importance of the 
old scholia contained in the Venice MS. It supplies the fullest and most 
trustworthy text now extant of comments on Aristophanes by the Alex- 
_ andrian scholars. In comparison with the Venetian scholia, those of the 
codex Ravennas are meagre and incoherent. Some fresh light for the 
textual criticism of Aristophanes may be hoped for from a closer study of 
the scholia in the Venetus, which the facsimile has now made easier for 
specialists. We are much indebted in this matter to Prof. John Williams 
White, of Harvard, who, as President of the Archaeological Institute of 
America, represented it on our Joint Committee. To his initiative the 
enterprise was primarily due. We are debtorsalso to Mr. T. W. Allen, for 
ba the palaeographical account of the codex which is prefixed to the facsimile. 
He shows how the work of writing the manuscript was divided among four 
-scribes: B took the beginning, C the middle, and D the end ; while A, the 
supervisor or διορθωτής, intervened more or less everywhere, and sometimes 
wrote a few pages continuously. It is also pointed out how the scholia 
᾿ relating to one page of text are constantly straying over to the next page. 
The scribe, or reviser, has often to warn the reader of this, by such remarks 
-as ζήτει εἰς τὸ ὄπισθεν, ‘look back. As Mr. Allen observes, the earliest 
‘owner to whom the Venetus can be traced is Cardinal Bessarion, with 
' whose library it came to the Venetian Republic. It received its present 
> binding in 1722. 
_ Another example of ἀὐροβεινλένη between England and America 
is furnished by the volume of the Tebtunis papyri, edited by Messrs. 
_ Grenfell, Hunt,and Smyly. The University of California defrayed the 
cost of the expedition, and is the owner of the papyri. The volume is 
= cities alike for that University and for the Graeco-Roman branch of 
the Egypt Exploration Fund. _ The papyri contained in this volume came 
rom the cemetery of crocodile mummies. It was a singular fate, even for 
155 analogous to blue-books, to be used as wrappings for embalmed 
pee Gate of the texts seta in _ this volume ranges from 


ΨΥ. αν 
° 


xl viii 


Iliad (ii. 95 —210), with some critical signs. But the contents are mainly 
official documents. These serve to illustrate many details of Ptolemaic 
economics ; among others, the various classes of land-tenure in the Fayoum, 
and the value at that period of silver relatively to copper, which seems to 
have been something like 30 to 1. Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt have also 
been making fresh finds at Oxyrhynchus, and it must soon be hoped that 
further funds will be subscribed which may enable them to complete their 
excavations there, 

With regard to the progress of Hellenic archaeology during the 
past year, the centre of interest has certainly been Crete. There is reason, 
I believe, to hope that at a special meeting of this Society in the autumn 
Mr. Arthur Evans will give us an account of his most recent discoveries, 
illustrated by photographs and drawings. In view of that prospect, even 
the attempt at a bare summary would be inopportune now ; we shall look 
forward to having the latest discoveries at Cnossus described by the 
explorer himself. Besides those excavations, noticed in the Report, 
which the British School has conducted at Palaikastro, another Cretan 
‘find’ deserves mention,— that of a fine palace discovered by the 
Italians at Agia Triadha, where some large talents of copper have been 
found, like those represented on the tomb of Rekhmara at the a Egypuae 
Thebes. 

Outsidé of Crete, interesting results have been obtained at several 
places in the Hellenic lands. At Orchomenus in Boeotia Professor 
Furtwangler has unearthed a prehistoric palace with frescoes, vases and 
inscriptions, in characters said to be similar to some of those found at 
Cnossus. Dr. Dérpfeld, seeking in Leucas for the house of Odysseus or his 
prototype, is said to have come upon a large prehistoric settlement. 

On several other sites, Hellenic remains of a later age have been. 
disclosed. At Samos the Greek Archaeological Society has been engaged 
in excavating the Heraeum. ‘The temple of Poseidon and Amphitrite has 
been brought to light at Tenos. At Cos, Dr. Herzog has found the temple 
of Asclepios. It may be recollected that, in the fourth mime of Herondas, 
some women of Cos bring gifts to Asclepios at his temple, and converse 
admiringly on the objects of art which they see around them. They speak 
of certain statues and allude to the inscriptions on their bases. Some of 
these statue-bases have been found. The site of Tralles has yielded 
important sculptures of the Hellenistic period. At Pergamum a newly- 
found inscription shows that the great altar there was built by Attalus II. 
This list might be enlarged, but the results thus briefly noted will suffice 
to show at how many points the year’s work has been going forward. One 
other discovery should be mentioned—that of the temple of the Pythian 
Apollo at Argos. The name of that city reminds us that Dr. Charles 
Waldstein and his colleagues of the American School are to be con- 
gratulated on the recent publication of the first of the two stately volumes 
embodying the results of their exploration of the Argive Heraeum, in 
1892—1895. This first volume is devoted to a General Introduction, 


xlix 


* Geology, Architecture, Marble Statuary, and Inscriptions. The second 
. volume of this important work is to follow at no long interval. Another 
publication of the past year which may be noticed is the work on ‘ Ancient 
Athens’ by Professor Ernest Gardner. While mainly topographical 
in treatment, it regards topography from the historical point of view. 
Early Attic art generally, and that of the sepulchral reliefs in particular, are 
included in the scope of the volume, which should be welcome to students. 
In looking back on those events of the year which concern our 
studies, a word may perhaps be said as to an incident which has attracted 
considerable attention in France, and which is not devoid of instruction : 
I refer to the lively controversy regarding the so-called tiara of Saitapharnes, 
The official enquiry, which was entrusted to M. Clermont Ganneau, has 
established the following facts. The tiara was elaborated, with the help 
of some really ancient pieces, by a living artist at Odessa. For the 
Scythian subjects which he represented on the tiara, his authority was a 
work by two Russian scholars on the antiquities of Southern Russia. For 
the Greek subjects he consulted a German work entitled ‘ Picture- Atlas 
for the Study of World-History.’ This book accounts for some of the 
most peculiar figures which adorn the tiara. One of these, purporting to 
be a wind-god, was taken from a page of the book which has the following 
headline : ‘Gods of light and of healing—Winds—Seasons.’ From the 
position of the figure on the page, the fabricator rashly inferred that it 
represented a wind. His own statement is that he made the tiara in good 
faith, and that it was ordered as a present for a Professor of Archaeology 
who was about to celebrate his jubilee. 

It is a matter of common, though perhaps vague, knowledge to most 
persons who care for such things, that the private art collections of this 
country are rich in treasurés from ancient Greece. But the astonishing 

5, wealth of such collections has never, perhaps, been more strikingly mani- 
fested than in the exhibition of Greek Art at the Burlington Fine Arts 
Club, which is to remain open till the end of July. To mention only a few 
of the objects which it contains, there are some of the Lansdowne Marbles, 
there is the Fragment of the Parthenon frieze lately found in an Essex 
garden, there is an early bronze equestrian statuette, once in the Forman 
collection—there is the Leconfield head of Aphrodite, the Pierpoint Morgan 
τς statuette of Eros, the Ludwig Mond portrait of Menander (?)—to say nothing 
of numerous bronzes, terra-cottas, vases, gems and coins. It is a great 
boon for students of Greek antiquity that this wonderful collection should 
have been brought together from so- many homes, by the generosity of 
τς the owners and the enterprise of the organisers. 
Ss A Society devoted to the promotion of Hellenic Studies may naturally 
_ welcome another event which has occurred since our last annual meeting. 
A Charter has been granted to a British Academy; one of its four 
sections is concerned with History and Archaeology, while another is 
levote: to, “ape As has lately been indicated with sufficient clear- 


= 
~~ 7 4 ἃ. “- 
ὦ ΟΝ = 


l 


work. Before, however, it can do work such as that in which foreign 
Academies find their most useful function, it must receive, as they receive; 
some measure of financial aid from the State. That such aid may 
ere long be granted, will, I do not doubt, be the wish and the hope of this 
Society. 

In concluding these remarks, I would ask leave to touch upon a subject 
to which the Report has already referred,—the loss which this Society has 
sustained by the death of Francis Cranmer Penrose. As one who enjoyed 
the privilege of his friendship for many years, and as his colleague in 
more than one relation, I cannot refrain to-day from adding a brief 
personal tribute, however inadequate, to that which has already been 
rendered in the name of our Council as a whole. The delicacy of his 
perception, the truth of his instinct in all matters relating to that noble art 
which he had made his life-study, were attributes which only an expert in 
that art could fully appreciate. To a larger circle, they were in some 
measure disclosed by his great work on the Parthenon. But all who were 
brought into relations with him came to know that the gifts of the artist, 
fine as these were, derived an enhanced charm, and a higher value, from 
the qualities of the man. He had true and rare dignity of character, and 
sweetness of character also ; he was full of courage and of manly confidence 
when there was anything to be done ; at the same time he was the most 
modest of men, and the most absolutely unselfish, never thinking for a 
moment of recognition or reward, but altogether bent, in his simple and 
whole-hearted way, on using all his powers to the best purpose for the 
work which he had in hand. He did much for the advancement of 
science in his chosen field, but he gave nothing better to those who were 
associated with him than the knowledge of a beautiful nature, and the 
example of a worthy life. They will always hold his memory in respect 
and affection. 

The adoption of the Report was seconded by Prof. Fairclough, and 
carried unanimously—The former President and Vice-Presidents were 
re-elected, and Prof. Ernest Gardner and Dr. C. Waldstein were elected 
Vice-Presidents. Prof. J. B. Bury and Dr. A. 5. Hunt were elected to 
vacancies on the Council—Mr. Hogarth gave some account of his 
explorations in the Egyptian Delta and at Naucratis. 


Ἔοδι ‘aunf y1Sz 


F ᾿ See AITTIT ADAOAO ‘4aansvIa yl ἭΟΗ ‘QV VAIAHSANA “M SV19NOd 
᾿ ΝῊ ‘“aTLad Ἃ YOHLYV "1991109 γ1 puy puv ‘yoo ,s1ayULY PUL SIZYONOA dy} YA 7 ρϑαυάθιοο “γι ποῦοῦ STY} PoUTUTEXe DALY 2A, 
EEE 
Oo ς Ly Fee eee eee ene eeeessrecees 6666. preMs0j yy Bno1q oourleg 
----.--- --- -- . 
9 81 το 9 81 τοῦ 
| - ae ο ¢ Li ΠΥ Tete eee eee preMs0oy aouvjyg fe) gl oof Φοοοοοοοοοοὺοοοοοοθοο ofl Beever sesers "£061 ‘Ke asi€ 0} saidoy jo aes “ 
͵ Ξ + we Roma emperenesCrsveccsesccccnceresces pee aSvjsog pue Sunuug ἄρας, ‘ “ 0 Oo o1z Renee ican “** SaIpNys 
a) iS 8. ο ζ9 ΚΑ SEEROFs τε erepardesisaresere Ἱπηροῦν Saumur “" ὈΙΌΘΠΘΗ JO UOYOWOIg IY} 10} pon 91 Aq poouvape yseg ** 
a . 9 I 09s TPP ere TTPO Ύ rer ras) γαποοον Sunuig 5591 uopuaie|9 "Ἔ 9 ΠῚ 1€I POO meee ee eee eee eee ee EHH EEE Ee FEET EEE zool1 ‘ke 518 ye aouvleg oL 
. Y Ad τ ΑΝ, IE 
, ὌΝΩΝ AIINISOVA SANVHdOLSIUV 
oe | L I SF ΟΣ £o61 “(ἘΠ 7515 ΛΟ ΟΕ ye aouvleg oL 
J . EEE -" 
Bers, λα BES 6 τ 951} 
ἂς LZ I 9S soseesooeoBIQwUBE 3B ςς ςς 
7 F -.ν |) Se junosoy yeuinof jo sourjeg ““᾿ tke © hy Un ΡΝ ΤΩΝ sydvisojoyg 10 ajvg uo sanjekoy =: 
ιν wat ὶ ςς ee ceseccccescvcserces «Ido wk γυ SUONVAVIXY be ZL ΟΙ cz “οοοοοιουφοφοοοοοροφούθοοωφοφόσδοο γαποοοῦ 5901 1919 
εἴ, : 9 91 δ it Ud ‘ “ 
"--: - Προ τ πλεολετνος pung 9ptunsoey souvqdoysuy 911, 9 S10 ‘oy ‘souty ‘soyeordng jo sajyeg—junossy ἄλυτα 11 
a —jo yunosxy uo paouvapy “ 4 91 ιν —= 
Ἰ ‘ed nd oOo oSz ς 9 Ζ τ εδενοοοοοσοῦοοῦνο tees a Avy 
ι ¥ 0 O Gz “777 4. τοῖχο ἀΧΉ Ἐ}96 uend aq ς 9 ἔν sede I ‘1 ΔΟΝ-- Ἴπ90 
’ Ἧ \ O 0 Sz “5 aMoy 78 Jooyss YsHUg 91, sod € weyZunjoN jo uoNntiodi0D =. = 
i* . ree, ΟΠ ass ἐενδε so sere DUNT ἘὈΟΙΒΙΟΙ xq uvj}a19 I zi gl seco ween reeeneeee £061 ‘I judy 
ΑΥ̓͂ Ἢ ? ο ο ΟΟΙ εν wee wen eee susyyy ye jooyss ysnug 911, Ι ZI gI weet eee eeeeee Zool I "*PpO-—P01S 
<I fo ; —sjuuiry * ποῦ sod §E sayeA, τῇ πος MeN UO spuepIAIq’ “ἢ 
o. . ἣ - 7” ¢ z eee eee eeeenenes yurg tod ‘98v]s0g puy UOISsIWUIOD . re) ¢ ς deme nee κε anweneeee “bsy ‘ey VIO ‘ad “a ‘suonwuog “* 
=——) ) 8, ΠΤ’ οεκὐὐνος svencnngvnn σον cencener cer aeeers sapyg wiojury * 9: 7 ὃν, eek o's ee [eusnof jo sanyo yorg * ἐς κα 
ὧν f | Φιωὼ» A19u0Ne}S puv “930750 d ‘Sunuu d folic: « ο 9 ες ΝΕ. ξαθεεπξοῦις papa τ, fiviq ες: 
i ». eee  — “..... 2 uv syoog—juno0s9 eiary * oo (ὃ Θ΄ τ eee . ! 
5) ͵ oO 6 τὰ 580 Ay δι Ρ 1 a V ql x! ο ΟΙ +6 eee eee ees eee eeeereeeeeee suonduosqns 981 ce “ ; 
ἫΝ aes οι Vet ae seuss 
«ey ‘ke 1£ 0} auo 239.199 755 “ μιειλἌὌἈἑδἀὀἀ δοῦν So pg wre rv ewec cen ncsnccnchsnsccngessessenesre 
an 9 ο 6 gr coy 8 ΡΣ Cee δὰ fe) C1 Sto ΟΠ . τς ΩΝ ‘suondussqng SI9quiay ςς 
hy * ‘Kew 1518 01 avak auo ‘uvuvaiqry 55. ‘seuvyes ** ΟΙ 8 60b ———— 
“= Oo ¢ et ΠΣ aouvinsuy *¢ © Δὲ 9.6 0ϑενυνθον ὁτον εὖτε ἄνουν ers “USB Ayeg « ss 
OS OR “τ Π ΠΠππθοο zo61 Ὅ9(1 0} αὐϑά auo Guay kg ΟΙ Ἦν SOE ttt posttaveeet zo61 ‘key isi 18 souLly on πεν 
ha ‘ ‘ s 5 i 
t4 . Pp pie ¥ » F ἤ» F x Pree: Ζ 7 
ay! ‘LNNODOV HSVO Ὁ 


= 


“a. 


2 Ἐπ 


Γ 
ν᾿ = ΤΣ Pe 


a 


apse) oes ΝΣ , ὅ9η5 ἃ 


z τὸ bgS¥ “» 


» - bev see ten ere eewasenneane ΣΝ eee eeeee 861) ςς ae se 
oe ate : ene seesee ee eweeeweneeee ΣῊ ἐς κεν τε ζΖ ¥ γεν whoa aide inate wy λυ ’ “- 
τ Suravisugq pur Surmviq, + ἐ 0 ἐκ 8 σσσΝ a 
’ , - ε ΟΙ 6 #94 que 008 sbbsn0n ce svenesest aan See ᾽ UID 0. 


9) 4 eget? 00) 
J 5 , 


oo 


‘ 


A comparison with the receipts and Piece ae of the last ten years 


is furnished by the following tables :— : 
ΓΠΑΝΑΙΥ͂ΘΙΞΒ OF ANNUAL RECEIPTS FOR THE YEARS ENDING :— / 
3 at 3 ig 31 ae wel neler ae 31 ὅρων 3: ae δι Mays re gies a4 
| ~~ 
PIC Pim eh ΕΟ | δι} δε) ἔκ) &y | dha cos | doa | Go| Coe : 
ARR Soap oaks sexes ΡΥ τ. ΠΌΡΕ ῊΣ 44 14 9 41. %3 18 9 10 13 13 qj 
Life Compositions ...........++ 79 50 63 15 ἜΣ ΡΖ 63 78 78 94 - ' 
Libraries and Back Vols. ...... 186 | 122] 117} 126] εἰ8͵ 122| 163} 179 | 185} 202 . 
Entrance Fees .........ssess+ssee+ . oe 33 45 52 50. ὃ 
Dividends .......seseseeeerereererees 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 42 42 42 
Special Receipts— . 
Mr. D. G. Hogarth (Alex- 30 ὌΧ 
andria Grant Refunded) 
Loanandsaleof Lantern Slides 4 2 7 5 ee | 4 3 30 19 26 
9) vcs cee cesasenruawsass 3 ae | δὰ Pe 
Library Receipts...........+++ ; aN 2 2 2 I 
Royalty on and Sales of | 
Photographs ..........+++ 2 I I 2 2 I 2 
Donations— | 
F. Ὁ. Mocatta, Esq. ........ | 3 3 | 3 3 3 
E. H. Egerton, Esq...........- 5 | eee 
H. G. Hart, Esq. esses | | | 4] 
Miss E. C. Stevenson ......... | | ΠΕ: 
Library—W.Arkwright, Esq. | 3 ] ΕΣ 
1,034 910 915 | 816 | 789 820 | 960 - 1,037 | 1,022 | 1,079 
Balance from preceding year ... | 259. 214 | 340 | 360; 201; δὲ 131 252 | 409 
1,293 1,124 1,084 | 1,156 | 1,149 | 1,021 1,021 1,168 | 1,274 | 1,488 
ANALYSIS OF ANNUAL EXPENDITURE FOR THE YEARS ENDING :— 
a We Reece πη: 
Rent: cisicec cc τ ἐν ἐεενενν οἰ ς ιν ταν vee on | ἢ 4 | a Bae. 4 Ἔ ra a Ὧ 5 
Insurance II 15 15 | 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 
Salaries τὶ. Δ εις απο τοίου τυ συ θ 49 49 4, 52 50 60 60 60 60 69 
EADEARY secsbescecasecipssisaseaen ses 75 96 | 39 | 94 93 δι 73 74 32 80 
Sundry Printing, Epes: and ; 
Stationery ες νοις του νον eeeeee 49 49 46 29 45 32 38 61 41 72 
Lantern Slides Account......... δὲ} ee 13 29 17 35 
Photographs Account............ bs és τὸς 26 Ι 45. ee x 
‘Cost of Journal (less sales)...... 475 | 441| 394| 346] 516] 536| 390| 382| .361 454 
GrANtS acd cede res veges. ἐδ ενον νόσον 185 | 225 100 | 180] 125 | 150 200} 200| 200| 250 
Investments .........ssceeeeseeeeees 158 
Advanced on Account of— 
Facsimile of the Codex 
Venetus of Aristophanes. ase 
‘* Excavations at Phylakopi ” 156 
Commission and Postage per 
a oie ake ics ον νας 3 J 
EgyptExplorationFund—1, 100 
copies of Mr. Hogarth’s Report τῇ 23 
Photo Enlargements, Albums, 4 au 
1,079 | 955 744 796| 948) 960| 890| 916 | 865 | 1,432 
Balance... ..ccevereseressoowe onsaes 214| 169] 340) 360| 201 61 | 131 | 252] 409 56 
1,293 | 1,124 | 1,084 | 1,156 | 1,149 | 1,021 | 1,021 | 1,168 | 1,274 | 1,488 


π΄ --.-.... την LIST OF 
| BOOKS AND PAMPHLETS 


ADDED TO THE 


| LIBRARY OF THE SOCIETY 
SINCE THE PUBLICATION OF THE CATALOGUE. 


~Marca—Ocroser, 1903 


Abbott (G. F.) Macedonian Folklore, 8vo, Cambridge. 1903. 
Aeschylus. Persae. Ed. A. Sidgwick. ὅνο. Oxford, 1903. 
ἦ oo Septem contra Thebas, Ed. A. Sidgwick. 
8vo. Oxford. 1908, 
Anstice (J.) Selections from the Choric Poetry of the Greek dramatic 
Writers. ᾿ 8vo. London, 1832. 
Aristotle. Ethies. Ed. A. Grant. 2vols. 8vo. London. 1874. 
Berard (V.) Les Phéniciens et L’Odyssée. Tome I. 
8vo. Paris. 1902. 
British Museum. 
i - Department of Coins and Medals. 
ἫΝ Catalogue of Greek Coins in the British Museum, 
8vo. Parthia, By W. Wroth. 1903. 
Burlington Fine Arts Club. Exhibition of Ancient Greek Art. 
4to. London. 1903, 
Chandler (R.) Travels in Asia Minor, 4to. Oxford. 1775. 
Coleridge (H. N.) Introduction to the Study of the Greek Classic 
Poets. | 8vo. London, 1846. 


Τὰ Eleutheriades (N. Ρ.) ἡ ἀκίνητος ἰδιοκτησία ἐν Τουρκίᾳ. 


8vo. Athens. 1903. 
Freshfield (E.) A Memorandum on the Byzantine Capitals placed in 


the Church of the Wisdom of God, Lower Kingswood, 
Fol. 1903. 


his 4to, Munich. 1903. 

- ie E.) The Makers of Hellas. 8vo, London. 1903. 
idge (A. H. J.) and A. M. Clay. Sources for Roman History 

B.C. 133-70, 8vo. Oxford. 1903. 


liv 


Hardie (W. R.) Lectures on Classical Subjects. 
8vo. London. 1903. 


Lear (E.) Views in the Seven Ionian Islands. 
Fo]. London. 1863. 
Millingen (J.) Peintures Antiques de Vases Grecs de la Collection 
de Sir John Coghill, Bart. Fol. Rome. 1817. 
Niese (B.) Geschichte der Griechischen und Makedonischen Staaten 
seit der Schlacht bei Chaeronea. Part III. MHandbiicher 
der alten Geschichte. 2nd Series. 8vo. Gotha. 1903. 
Pallis (A.) A few notes on the Gospels according to St. Mark and 
St. Matthew. ~— . 8vo. Liverpool. 1903. 
Petersen (E.) ‘Trajans Dakische Kriege. II. Der zweite Krieg. 
8vo. Leipsic. 1903. 
Plato. Opera. Ed. J. Burnet. Vol. III, (Script. Class. Bibl. 
Oxon |. 8vo.- Oxford. 1903. 
Thirlwall (C.) History of Gieece. 8 vols. 8vo. London. 1855. 
Ward (J.) Greek Coins and the'r Parent. Cities. 
8vo. London. 1902. 
Wood (J. T.) Discoverés at Ephesus. 8vo. London. 1877. 


NOTICE TO CONTRIBUTORS. 


THE Council of the Hellenic Society having decided that it is desirable 
for a common system of transliteration of Greek words to be adopted in 
the Journal of Hellenic Studies, the following scheme has been drawn up 
by the Acting Editorial Committee in conjunction with the Consultative 
Editorial Committee, and has received the approval of the Council. 

In consideration of the literary traditions of English scholarship, the 
scheme is of the nature of a compromise, and in most cases considerable 
latitude of usage is to be allowed. | 


(1) All Greek proper names should be transliterated into the Latin 
alphabet according to the practice of educated Romans of the Augustan age. 
Thus « should be represented by ὁ, the vowels and diphthongs νυ, az, οἱ, ov 
by y, ae, oe, and τὸ respectively, final -os and -ov by -ws and -wm, and -pos 
by -er. 
f But in the case of the diphthong εἰ, it is felt that ei is more suitable 

than e or 7, although in names like Laodicea, Alexandria, 

where they are consecrated by usage, 6 or ὁ should be preserved ; 
also words ending in -εἰον must be represented by -ewm. 

A certain amount of discretion must be allowed in using the 
o terminations, especially where the Latin usage itself varies 
or prefers the o form, as Delos. Similarly Latin usage should 
be followed as far as possible in -e and -a terminations, 
eg., Priene, Smyrna. In some of the more obscure names 
ending in -pos, as Aéaypos, -e7 should be avoided, as likely. 
to lead to confusion. The Greek form -on is to be preferred 
to -o for names like Dion, Hieron, except in a name so common 
as Apollo, where it would be pedantic. 

Names which have acquired a definite English form, such as 
Corinth, Athens, should of course not be otherwise represented. 
It is hardly necessary to point out that forms like Hercules, 
Mereury, Minerva, should not be used for Heracles, Hermes, and 


. Athena, 


lvi 


- (2) Although names of the gods should be transliterated in the same 
way as other proper names, names of personifications and epithets such as 
Nike, Homonoia, Hyakinthios, should fall under § 4. 


(3) In no case should accents, especially the circumflex, be written over 
vowels to show quantity. 


(4) In the case of Greek words other than proper names, used as names 
of personifications or technical terms, the Greek form should be transliterated 
letter for letter, k being used for x, ch for y, but- y and w being substituted 
for v and ov, which are misleading in English, e.g., Nike, apoxyomenos, 
diadumenos, rhyton, 


This rule should not be rigidly enforced in the case of Greek 
words in common English use, such as aegis, symposium. It 
is also necessary to preserve the use of ow for ov in a 
certain number of words in which it has become almost 
universal, such as boule, gerousia. 


(5) The Acting Editorial Committee are authorised to correct all 
MSS. and proofs in accordance with this scheme, except in the case of a 
special protest from a contributor. All contributors, therefore, who object 
on principle to the system approved by the Council, are requested to inform 
the Editors of the fact when forwarding contributions to the Journal, 


In addition to the above system of transliteration, contributors to. the 
Journal of Hellenic Studies are requested, so far as possible, to adhere to the 
following conventions :— 


Quotations from Ancient and Modern Authorities, 


Names of authors should not be underlined; titles: of books, articles, 
periodicals, or other collective publications shottid-be- underlined (for italics) 
If the title of an article is quoted as well as the publication in which it is 
contained, the latter should be bracketed. Thus: 


Six, ‘Jahrb, xviii. 1903, p. 34, 
or— 
at ἢ Six, Protogenes (Jahrb. xviii. 1903), p. 34, 

But asa rule the shorter form of citation is to be piotienlg: 


The number of the edition, when necessary, should be Naish by a 
sre figure above the line; 60. Dittenb. Syl 2123. 


Titles of Periodical and Collective. Publications, 
The following abbreviations are suggested, as already in more or less 


general use. In other cases, no abbreviation which is not readily identified 
should be employed, . 


A,-E.M, = Archiologisch-epigraphische Mittheilungen, 

Ann. d. I. =Annali dell’ Instituto. 

_ Arch, Anz, =Archiiologischer Anzeiger (Beiblatt zam Jahrbuch), 

_ Arch, Zeit, = Archiiologische Zeitung. 

Ath. Mitth,=Mittheilungen des Deutschen Arch, Inst., Athenische Abtheilung. 
Baumeister= Baumeister, Denkmiiler des klassischen Altertums, 
B.C.H, = Bulletin de Correspondance Helléniqie. 

Berl. Vas. =Furtwingler, Beschreibung der Vasensammlung zu Berlin, 
B.M. Bronzes= British Museum Catalogue of Bronzes, 

B.M.C. = British Museum Catalogue of Greek Coins, 

B.M, Inser.=Greek Inscriptions in the British Museum, 

B.M. Vases= British Museum Catologue of Vases, 1893, etc. 

B.S, A.= Annual of the British School at Athens, 

Bull. d. I.=Bullettino dell’ Instituto, . 

C.I.G.=Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum, 

C.1.L,= Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. 

Cl. Rev, =Classical Review. 

C.R. Acad. Inser,=Comptes Rendus de ]’Académie des Inscriptions. 
Dar.-Sagl. = Daremberg-Saglio, Dictionnaire des Antiquités, 

Dittenb. Syll.=Dittenberger, Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum. 

"EG. ’Apy. τε  Ἐφημερὶς ’Ἀρχαιολογική. 

G.D.I.=Collitz, Sammlung der Griechischen Dialekt-Inschriften. 
Gerh. A.V.=Gerhard, Auserlesene Vasenbilder. 
G.G.A,=Gittingische Gelehrte Anzeigen, 

I.G.= Insecriptiones Graecae.! 

I.G.A.= Rohl, Inseriptiones Graecae antiquissimae. ; 
Jahrb.=Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts. 
Jahresh. = Jahreshefte des Oesterreichischen a ΒΆΡΗ Institutes, 
J.H.S.=Journal of Hellenic Studies. — 

Le Bas-Wadd. =Le Bas-Waddington, Voyage Archéologique, 
Michel= Michel, Recueil d’Inscriptions grecques, 

Mon. d. I.=Monumenti dell’ Instituto. 
Miiller-Wies. = Miiller-Wieseler, Denkmiiler der alten Kunst. 
Mus. Marbles=Collection of Ancient Marbles in the British Museum. 
Neue Jahrb. kl. Alt.=Neue Jahrbiicher fiir das klassische Allertum. 
Neue Jahrb. Phil. = Neue Jahrbiicher fiir Philologie. 


>. ἃ The attention of contributors ‘ts called to the fact that the titles of the volumes of the secord 
" issuz of the Corpus of Grock “gic ἐσαμεὶ published by the Prussian Academy, have now been 
changed, as follows :— 
16. I. = Inser. Atticae anno Euclidis vetustiores. : 
ὟΝ ae _ aetatis quae est inter Eucl. ann, et Augusti tempora. 
Sr) oa +»  aetatis Romanae. 


Argolidis, 
1» _ Megaridis et Boeotiae. 
eee 


lviii 
Num. Chr.= Numismatic Chronicle. 


Num. Zeit.= Numismatische Zeitschrift. 

Pauly-Wissowa = Pauly-Wissowa, Real- Encyclopiidie der classischen Alettimey ae 
schaft. *. ΟΣ ek. ξ Cie ΦΦΘΉΟ 2 = 

Philol. = Philologus. ; 

Rev. Arch. =Revue Archéologique. 

Rev. Et. Gr. =Revue des Etudes Greeques. ~ 

Rev. Num.= Revue Numismatique, _ 

Rev. Philol.=Revue de Philologie.” 

Rh. Mus. =Rheinisches Museum, . 


Rém. Mitth. κἸΠΗΒΟΠΌσΒοΝ des Deutschen Archiologischen Thatitute, Rémische Abtheil- 
ung. : 


Roscher= : Roscher, Lexicon der My thologie. 
T.A.M.=Tituli Asiae Minoris. 
Z. f. N.=Zeitschrift fiir Numismatik: 


Transliteration of Inscriptions. . 
[ ] Square brackets to indicate additions, 1.6. a lacuna filled by. conjecture. 
( ) Curved brackets to indicate alterations, ie. (1) the. resolution..of an 
abbreviation or symbol ; (2) letters misrepresented: by the engraver ; 
(3) letters wrongly omitted by the ig ae er.; 9 pasiere of Bs 
copyist. 
< > Angular brackets to date omissions, 1.6. to etictose dipertidui 
letters appearing on the original. © | 
Dots to Tepresent an unfilled jacuna when the exact number: of missing 
letters is known. wears = 
- - - Dashes for the same purpose, when. the ninber of missing otters is 
not known. 
Uncertain letters should have dots under them. 
Where the original has iota adscript, it should - be reproduced it in that form ; : 
otherwise it should be supplied as subscript. 


The aspirate, if it appears’ in’ the. ἐπεὶ ὑύδαν, should be ‘represented bys 
special sign, ". ; 


Quotations from MSS. and Literary Texts. 


The same conventions should be employed for this purpose a as for i inserip- 
tions, with the following impor tant exceptions :— ~~ 


{Ὁ Curved brackets to indicate oUly. the resolution of an abbreviation or 


symbol. : 

[{1] Double square brackets to ὁ enclose superfluous letters appearing on the 
original. , 

< > Angular brackets to enclose letters supplying a an “omission in the 
original. 


s 


The Editors desire to impress. upon contributors the necessity of clearly 
and accurately indicating accents and breathings, as the neglect of this 
precaution adds very considerably to the cost of production of the Journal. 


The Society 
for the Promotion of ‘thellenic Studies. 


PRESIDENT— 


PROFESSOR Sir RICHARD JEBB, Lirt.D., D.C.L., LL.D., M.P. 


THE Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies was founded in 1879 for 
the following objects :— 


I. To advance the study of Greek language, literature, and art, and to illus- 
trate the history of the Greek race in the ancient, Byzantine, and 
Neo-Hellenic periods, by the publication of memoirs and unedited 
documents or monuments in a Journal to be issued periodically. 


II. To collect drawings, facsimiles, transcripts, plans, and photographs of 
Greek inscriptions, MSS., works of art, ancient sites and remains, and 
with this view to invite travellers to communicate to the Society 
notes or sketches .of archeological and topographical interest. 


III. To organise medns by which members of the Society may have 
increased facilities for visiting ancient sites and pursuing archzological 
researches in countries which, at any time, have been the sites of 
Hellenic civilisation. 


In accordance with the first object the Journal of Hellenic Studies was issued 
in 1880, and has since been published in half-yearly parts, under the management 
of an Editorial Committee. The present Committee consists of PROFESSOR 
ERNEST GARDNER, Mr. G, F, Hitt, and Mr. F. ἃ. Kenyon, with a Consultative 
Committee consisting of Srr RicHarD JEBB, PROFESSOR ByWaTER, Sir E. MAUNDE 
Tompson, Mr. Sipney Corvin, Proressor Percy GARDNER, and Mr. R. CARR 
BOSANQUET (ex officio), as Director of the British School at Athens. The Journa/ is 
recognised not only in England but elsewhere as one of the leading organs of classical 
archeology. Twenty-two volumes have now been issued. “fo'enable the Journa/ to 
be carried on with the same efficiency, and, further, to enable the Society to fulfil 
_ the’ other objects for which it #tas created, and more especially to take in hand or 


to support the work of exploration in Hellenic countries and the publication of 
results, the Council appeal to all members to do what they can to enlarge the 
numbers of the Society, and invite all persons who desire to see England at least 
on a level with other countries in devotion to Greek studies, to offer themselves as 
candidates for election. With its present 819 members and 150 subscribing 
Libraries the margin of revenue left after the publication in each year of two 
numbers of the Journal with adequate illustrations is not large enough to allow 


of more than occasional small grants for other purposes. If’ the numbers could - 


be raised to 1,000 or more, there would remain every year a surplus which might 
be devoted with real effect to the prosecution of archzological research in whatever 
-direction might seem advisable. Even as it is the Society has been able to give 
substantial help to the work of the British School at Athens, of the Asia Minor, 
Cyprus, and Cretan Exploration Funds, as weil as to some private explorers. 

By an arrangement recently made with the Society of Antiquaries, the Society 


holds occasional meetings in that Society’s rooms in Burlington House, when papers. 


are read and discussed, and any communications of importance can be made to 
members. The books and periodicals which have been acquired by the Society 
for the use of members are kept in a room secured for the purpose at 22 Albemarle 
Street. During the past few years the Council ‘have made considerable progress 
towards the formation of a good Reference Library of works dealing with every 
department of Greek art, language, and history: As the Library grows its usefulness 
grows also, and it is eminently desirable that the Society should be in a position 
to devote from £75 to £100 a year to this object. It should be added that 
a very competent Librarian has been appointed; and is within stated times daily 
at the service of members when the Library is open. 

Some years ago the Council began the collection of a series of photographs of 
Greek sites, scenery, and objects of aft, by inviting travellers to supply to members 
at cost price copies of photographs taken in the course of their journeys in Greek 
lands.. Of some of these photographs excellent enlargements were made by the 
_Autotype Co., which are supplied to members at a low rate. It was a natural step 
from this beginning to have lantern slides made from these and other Greek 
subjects, which could be lent at a low rate to members for lecturing and teaching 
purposes. ‘This branch of the Society’s work met with so much encouragement 
that in 1898 the Council accepted an offer from one of their body, Mr. J. Linton 
Myres, of Christ Church, Oxford, to undertake the organisation of a collection 
both of photographs and lantern slides which should be so far complete as to. 

supply all the reasonable demands of lecturers and teachers. It need hardly 
be pointed out that this development involves not only considerable labour on the 
part of the organiser, but also no small demand upon the Society’s funds. But it 


7 ia Sag ain hs who the collection is made and organised (and the work is now 


Ἂν τ κοΐ item have been made το the pkivileges of 
ον membership, and the Society _ will have ;strengthened, its special claim upon the 


. _ support of all serious students “of Greek art, archeology, history, and literature, 


___and particularly of members of the teaching profession, whether at the Universities 


or in Public Schools. Lists of photographs and lantern slides can be obtained 
from the Librarian at 22 Albemarle Street,.to whom also should be addressed 
all applications from members desiring to borrow them. 

The foregoing summary of the objects and the work of the Society. will serve 
to show that as time goes on the demands made upon its resources are likely to 
increase rather than to diminish, while ‘some loss of revenue must o¢cur year by 
year through the death or resignation of members. It is therefore’ of ‘the first 
importance that the supply of candidates for membership should be constant and 
increasing. Applications for membership, or for information about the Society, 
should be addressed to the Hon. Sec., Mr. George Macmillan, St. Martin’s Street, 
_ London, W.C. 

Libraries nay subscribe to the Journal of Hellenic Studies at the members’ 
subscription of one guinea per annum. Librarians desiring to avail themselves of 

_ this privilege should apply to the Hon. Sec. 

The Annual Subscription of One Guinea entitles members to receive a copy of 
the Journal of Hellenic Studies as published. Back numbers of the Jowrna/ can be 
obtained by new members on payment of the subscription for the years, in which 
they appeared. The entrance fee due from new members on election is one guinea. 
The Annual Subscription can be compounded for by a single payment of £1 5 155. 
The Life Subscription does-not entitle new members to the volumes issued previous 
to the year of election, but all back volumes may still be had on payment of 
the subscription for the year in which they were issued. All ‘Subscriptions are 
payable to the account of the Seenery at Messrs. Robarts, Lubbock and Co., 
15 Lombard Street. 

_ The affairs of the Society are administered by the Council, the present consti- 
tution of which is shown on the following page. 


— Lonpox, Movember, 1903. 


᾿ , ᾿ 
FER Ae ΑΝ 
as <3 ΐ 
» > > ’ f ΝΜ 
+ $0 uv > 
: παν ἢ Ν ! 
, sis ΓΤ Ἢ 
BARS κι ν 0 ἃ BION J, ὙἈλ' 


=" >» ae, » 
ΓΝ - 


Ἢ ‘ ' ery ΤῊΝ 


Vv a= 


4 T. HUDSON WILLIAMS 


Athenians when they attacked the island at the instigation of Solon. As the 
capture of Salamis can hardly have occurred before 600 B.c., we must reject the 
above suggestion, for it would give Theagenes a reign of at least  twenty- 
five years, in which case his name would certainly have been inserted by 
Aristotle in his list of long tyrannies, since the fourth place on the list is held by 
the tyranny of Hieron and Gelon, which lasted only eighteen years (including 
the reigns of the ¢wo tyrants).!° The reign of Theagenes must then have been a 
short one, and we shall not be far wrong if we reduce its duration to five or 
six years. 

Plutarch’ tells us that after expelling Theagenes the Megarians enjoyed 
a short period of ‘moderate’ government, and afterwards, under the leader- 
ship of demagogues ‘who gave the people copious draughts of the wine of 
freedom, became thoroughly corrupt and violent towards the rich, entering 
their houses and treating themselves to sumptuous banquets at their ex- 
pense. Finally they passed a measure compelling the money-lenders to return 
the interest they had exacted. In another passage (Qu. Gr. 59) we find a 
reference to an incident in the history of this same democracy which the 
author refers to as ἡ ἀκόλαστος δημοκρατία, ἣ καὶ THY παλιντοκίαν ἐποίησε 
καὶ τὴν ἱεροσυλίαν. Then follows an account of an act of violence com- 
mitted by τῶν Μεγαρέων οἱ θρασύτατοι μεθυσθέντες, who, ὕβρει καὶ 
ὠμότητι, assaulted ἃ θεωρία Πελοποννησίων. As the state neglected to 
punish the authors of this act of veritable Hooliganism,” the Amphictyons 
interfered and punished the ‘accursed’ citizens, some of whom were put 
to death and others driven into exile* The conduct of this democracy 
is characterized by the same expressions in the two passages of the 
Quaestiones Graecae; its features are ἀσέλγεια, ὕβρις, ὠμότης and ἀταξία ; 
it afforded the stock instance of democratic lawlessness at Megara, and 
it is distinguished from all others by the epithet ἀκόλαστος. 

If, in other Greek authors who deal with the fortunes of Megara, we 
find references to a democracy in which prominence 18: given to the violence 
and lawlessness of the commons, we shall, unless it is otherwise stated, 
not be wrong in assuming that the one referred to by Plutarch is 
meant. 


14 2,6, if we accept 624 8.0. as the latest date 
possible for the attempt of Cylon. 

15 Aristotle, 1815b. τῶν δὲ λοιπῶν ἡ (τῶν) 
περὶ Ἱέρωνα καὶ Γέλωνα περὶ Συρακούσας. ἔτη 3 
οὐδ᾽ αὕτη πολλὰ διέμεινεν, ἀλλὰ τὰ σύμπαντα 
δυεῖν δέοντα εἴκοσι: Τέλων μὲν γὰρ ἑπτὰ τυραν- 
vebous τῷ ὑγδόῳ τὸν βίον ἐτελεύτησεν, δέκα 
δ᾽ Ἱέρων, Θρασύβουλος δὲ τῷ ἑνδεκάτῳ μηνὶ ἐξέ- 
πεσεν. ai δὲ πολλαὶ τῶν τυραννίδων ὀλιγοχρόνιαι 
πᾶσαι γεγόνασι παντελῶς. 

16 Quaestiones Graecae, 18, 

Μεγαρεῖς Θεαγένη, τὸν τύραννον, ἐκβαλόντες, 
ὀλίγον χρόνον ἐσωφρόνησαν κατὰ τὴν πολιτείαν" 
εἶτα πολλὴν---κατὰ Πλάτωνα.---καὶ ἄκρατον αὐτοῖς 


ἐλευθερίαν τῶν δημαγωγῶν οἰνοχοούντων, δια- 
φθαρέντες παντάπασι, τά τε ἄλλα τοῖς πλουσίοις 
ἀσελγῶς προσεφέροντο, καὶ παριόντες εἰς τὰς 
οἰκίας αὐτῶν οἱ πένητες ἠξίουν ἑστιᾶσθαι καὶ 
δειπνεῖν πολυτελῶς᾽ εἰ δὲ μὴ τυγχάνοιεν, πρὸς 
βίαν καὶ μεθ᾽ ὕβρεως ἐχρῶντο πᾶσι. TéAos δὲ 
δόγμα θέμενοι, τοὺς τόκους ἀνεπράττοντο παρὰ 
τῶν δανειστῶν, ods δεδωκότες ἐτύγχανον, παλιν- 
τοκίαν τὸ γινόμενον προσαγορεύσαντες. 

17 οἱ μὲν Μεγαρεῖς 8: ἀταξίαν τῆς πολιτείας 
ἠμέλησαν τοῦ ἀδικήματος. 

18 As Athens had her σεισάχθεια and τὸ ἄγος 
so Megara had her παλιντοκία and of ἐναγεῖς. 


i se 


THEOGNIS AND HIS POEMS. 5 


For further light on the subject we must go to the Politics of Aris- 
totle,” 1304b. παραπλησίως "ὃ δὲ καὶ ἡ ἐν Μεγάροις κατελύθη δημοκρατία' 
οἱ γὰρ δημαγωγοί, ἵνα χρήματα ἔχωσι δημεύειν, ἐξέβαλλον πολλοὺς τῶν 
γνωρίμων, ἕως πολλοὺς ἐποίησαν τοὺς φεύγοντας, οἱ δὲ κατιόντες ἐνίκησαν 
μαχόμενοι τὸν δῆμον καὶ κατέστησαν τὴν ὀλιγαρχίαν. 

1302 b. ἐν ταῖς δημοκρατίαις [στασιάζουσιν] οἱ εὔποροι καταφρονή- 
σαντες τῆς ἀταξίας καὶ ἀναρχίας, οἷον καὶ ἐν Θήβαις μετὰ τὴν ἐν Οἰνοφύ- 
τοῖς μάχην κακῶς πολιτευομένοις ἡ δημοκρατία διεφθάρη, καὶ ἡ Μεγαρέων 
δι᾿ ἀταξίαν καὶ ἀναρχίαν ἡττηθέντων, καὶ ἐν Συρακούσαις πρὸ τῆς Γέλωνος 
τυραννίδος, καὶ ἐν Ῥόδῳ ὁ δῆμος πρὸ τῆς ἐπαναστάσεως. 

The characteristics of this Megarian democracy are exactly those given 
by Plutarch: if Aristotle had not the ἀκόλαστος δημοκρατία in mind when 
he was talking of ἀσέλγεια, ἀταξία, ἀναρχία, and confiscations, he would 
surely have said so, especially as in the very same passage he is so careful 
_ to specify the other examples he adduces, ¢.9., ἐν Θήβαις μετὰ τὴν κτλ; 
there was no need of further description in the case of Megara, as the 
reference was at once plain to all.24_ We gather from Plutarch that demo- 
cracy was established after a short period of ‘moderate’ government sub- 
sequent to the expulsion of Theagenes. A sentence in the Poetics of 
Aristotle (ch. 3:3) may give us further help in fixing the date.” The 
Megarians, we are told, claim comedy as their own, dating its invention ἐπὶ 
τῆς παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς δημοκρατίας. 

The Parian marble (B.c. 264—3)* tells us that the people οἵ Icaria 
instituted competitions in comedy at a date somewhere between 581 
and 562%: Susarion is referred to as the ‘inventor. Whether the above 
statement is correct or not, we can certainly draw the following conclusions 
People living less than sixty years after Aristotle * believed that comedies 


were performed in Attica before 562 B.c, In the time of Aristotle (without 


19 The ancients attributed a Μεγαρέων πολι- 
rela to Aristotle. Strabo, lib. vii. 7 af ’Apio- 
τοτέλους πολιτεῖαι δηλοῦσιν... φησὶ... ἐν τῇ 
᾽οπουντίων καὶ Μεγαρέων. 

30 παραπλησίως refers to the preceding in- 
stances of the statement made at the beginning 
of the chapter, viz. af μὲν οὖν δημοκρατίαι 
μάλιστα μεταβάλλουσι διὰ τὴν τῶν δημαγωγῶν 
τς τὖ΄΄ ἀσέλγειαν. 

Ἶ *1 Another passage in the Polities probably 
refers to the overthrow of this democracy : 
1800a περὶ τὰς τῶν ἀρχῶν καταστάσεις... 
ὥσπερ ἐν Μεγάροις ἐκ τῶν συγκατελθόντων καὶ 
συμμαχεσαμένων πρὸς τὸν δῆμον. Some (c.g. 


return of the exiles narrated in Thuc. iv. 74, 
_ but as Welcker pointed out in his Prolegomena 
fethovenls (p. xii.) this is impossible owing to 
᾿ς the words ἐνίκησαν μαχόμενοι, ἡττηθέντων and 
a χεσαμένων : for the exiles of 424 did not 
by defeating their 


Cauer) refer 1300 a, 1302 b, and 1304 b to the © 


opponents in battle but returned under an 
agreement (κοινολογησάμενοι κατάγουσι). 

22 τῇς μὲν κωμῳδίας (ἀντιποιοῦνται) of Μεγαρεῖς, 
of τε ἐνταῦθα, ὡς ἐπὶ τῆς παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς δημοκρατίας 
γενομένης, καὶ οἱ ἐκ Σικελίας. 

38 Flach, Chronicon Partum, 1884, Christ 
‘Gr. Litt.-Gesch.’ in Miiller’s Handbuch, vol. 
vii. ed. 3, 1898, p. 557. 

* There was a definite date engraved on the 
marble, but it is no longer legible. The entry 
comes in between the archonship of Damasias 
and the tyranny of Pisistratus: Flach, p. 18, 
§39 ἀφ᾽ οὗ ἐν ᾿Αθ[ήν]αις κωμφίδῶν χο]ρ[ὸς 
ηὐρ]έθη [στη]σάνϊτων αὐτὸν] τῶν ᾿Ικαριέων, 
εὑρόντος Σουσαρίωνος, καὶ ἄθλον ἐτέθη πρῶτον 
ἰσχάδω[ν] ἄρσιχο[ 5] καὶ οἴνου [ἀμφορ]ε[ὑ5]. 

Bergk reads ἐν ἁμάξαις κωμῳδία ηὑρέθη Gr. 
Litt.-Gesch. iv. p. 48, 

25 Some think that the compiler of the 
chronicle derived his information from a pupil 
of Aristotle. 


6 T. HUDSON WILLIAMS 


being contradicted by him) the people of Megara claimed the invention of 
comedy. They would not be able to get anyone to listen to their claim 
unless they asserted that comedies were performed at Megara at a date 
previous to the popularly accepted date of the Icarian contests and the 
appearance of Susarion; whether they claimed him as a Megarian or not is 
a question which does not concern us here.”° 

The date they gave was ἐπὶ τῆς παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς δημοκρατίας. So this 
democracy must have been established at least before 570 B.c., probably a 
good many years earlier. What happened at Megara after the restoration of 
the oligarchs must remain a matter of conjecture. Welcker assumes that 
the commons again made themselves masters of the state and set up a 
democracy which remained in power till Olymp 89. 1.27 But this theory 
must be modified, as Thucydides closes his account of the changes at Megara 
(424 B.c.) with the words: καὶ πλεῖστον δὴ χρόνον αὕτη ὑπ᾽ ἐλαχίστων 
γενομένη ἐκ στάσεως μετάστασις ξυνέμεινεν. As this must have been 
written before 396 B.c. (the probable date of the historian’s death), the 
oligarchy of 424 must have broken the record when they had been consider- 
ably less than thirty years in power. We can therefore safely assume that 
political power at Megara changed hands several times in the interval 
assigned by Welcker to democracy alone. 

Poems which undoubtedly belong to Theognis contain references to a 
state of things parallel to that described by Plutarch and Aristotle, and it 
can be proved that he wrote poems addressed to his young friend Cyrnus 
soon after the democratic revolution. In announcing his intention of 
writing poems for the special benefit of Cyrnus, Theognis assumes the tone 
of a man who has wide experience and talks to his young protégé like a 
father.” We can infer that the age of the poet at the time of the democratic 
revolution was at least thirty. 

Although the elegy 773-782 does not bear the σφρηγίς we need not 
hesitate to accept it as genuine, for the mention ® of the god Phoebus building 
the citadel for Alcathous proves conclusively that the poem is the work of a 
Megarian and besides Theognis we know of no Megarian poet who could 
have written it. It is a prayer addressed to Apollo entreating him ‘to keep 
the wanton horde of the Medes away from our town.’ We have seen that 
Theognis was born before the close of the seventh century ; so the references 
in the above lines cannot be to the Persian invasions of 490 or 480 B.c., but 


°6 Aristotle does not mention him. 

27 Welcker, Proleg. xii. ‘Plebs postea denuo 
superior facta est, quum Ol, 89. 1, ex demo- 
cratia iterum paucorum dominatum restitutum 
esse constet ex Thucyd. iv. 74 ; ef. v. 31’; also 
xiii. ‘popularis status qui ad Ol. 89. 1. usqwe 
tenuit.’ Cf. St. Hilaire in a note*to ch. iii. 3 
of his translation of Aristotle’s Poetics (1858) : 
‘cette démocratie dura sans doute jusqu’a la 
guerre du Péloponnése: du moins Thucydide, 
livre iv. ch 74, -parle-t-il de la. réyolution 


oligarchique qui renversa le gouvernement de 
Mégara.’ Cf. F. G. Schneidewin, Delectus Poet. 
Eleg. Graec. (1838), p. 54, ‘quum principatus 
nobilium denuo popularibus turbis cessisset : 


᾿ qui status ad Olymp. 89. 1. usque obtinuit.’ 


38 This is discussed in detail below. 
°9 Theog. 27-30. ἢ 
Ἢ Φρῖβε ἄναξ, αὐτὸς μὲν ἐπύργωσας πόλιν 
ἄκρην, 
᾿Αλκαθόῳ Πέλοπος παιδὶ χαριζόμενος. 


| 


THEOGNIS AND HIS POEMS. 7 


to the terror caused by the sudden appearance of Cyrus and by his conquests 
in Asia, when some of the Asiatic Greeks had to flee from their homes and 
seek a refuge across the sea.*t The general tone of this elegy, as well as of 
757-768 (probably written bythe same poet),? is much better suited to the 
circumstances of 545 B.0. than the years of actual fighting with a Persian 
army in Greece itself. The language used does not suggest a present danger, 


but rather a cloud looming on the horizon, the fear of an invasion made 


possible by the want of agreement among the Greeks themselves, Instead 
of calling his fellow citizens to arms and arousing their martial ardour, the 
poet urges them to drink and be merry, and not to fret about the Persians. 
The care of the city he is quite willing to leave to the gods. According 
to our calculations the age of Theognis would be about sixty in the year 
545 B.c., and this accords very well with his prayer (in vv. 767, 8) that 
‘baleful old age’ should be kept away from him. The dates we have 
arrived at agree with those given by ancient grammarians and chronologists 
who place the poet’s floruit at Ol. 59-57, ¢g. Hieron: Ol. 59, 1, Chronic. 
Pasch. Ol. 57, Suidas γεγονὼς ἐν τῇ vO’ ᾿Ολυμπιάδι.33 

Many attempts have been made to reconstruct the political history of 
Megara during the first half of the sixth century before Christ: the most 
detailed is that of Cauer.*4 Starting with the poems of Theognis, he dis- 
tinguishes two periods in the political life of the poet, of which he gives the 
following account. Though an aristocrat by birth, Theognis entered the 
political arena as a member of the middle-class party which included men of 
low birth who had enriched themselves by trade and manufacturing industry : 
among them were many mechanics and especially armourers. This party 
Cauer refers to as the ‘ Handwerkerstand.’ He traces the fortunes of this in- 
dustrial class up to the time immediately preceding the tyranny of Theagenes 
(about 630) when their extreme poverty had driven them to seek a remedy 
in revolution. It was mainly by their help that the tyrant raised himself to 
power, and they derived the greatest benefits from his rule, for the only 


31 Cf. the threat of Cyrus, Herod. i. 153 seventh century B.c. ; and this is one οἱ his 


᾿ roto, ἣν ἐγὼ ὑγιαίνω, ob τὰ ᾿Ιώνων πάθεα ἔσται 
ἔλλεσχα ἀλλὰ τὰ οἰκήϊα. 
82 Herzberg attributes it to Xenophanes, cf. 
τς Sitzler, Theognidis Reliqwiac, p. 86, note 64 a. 
33 Theog. vv. 891-4 are taken by Christ (Gr. 
Litt.-Gesch. p. 131) to refer to the Athenian 
expedition under the Cypselid Miltiades in the 
year 506 B.c., and are used as an argument in 
favour of a later date for Theognis (757 sqq., 
118 sqq., refer to the expedition of Mardonius 
4902 B.c.). But there is no good ground for 
Rae the elegy (891-4) to Theognis, nor 
e reference so clear as Christ would have 
jieve Beloch, in the article referred to 
note ‘States: his belief that Megara 
ough the social revolution (seine 
sei n 1789) at the end of the 


reasons for refusing to regard Theognis as a 
native of Megara Nisaea. He tacitly admits 
that if this Megara was the home of Theoguis, 
the poet must have lived at the end of the 
seventh century. His interpretation of 773- 
782, which he takes to refer to the events of 
the year 480 B.c., compels him to reject this 


“early date ; and he considers that the political 


elegies refer to the struggles between the nobles 
and the people in Sicilian Megara, as the other 
Megara had passed through the same crisis 
more than a century before. 

84. Parteien und Politiker in Megara und Athen, 
von Friedrich Cauer, Stuttgart, 1890, cf. F. ° 
Cauer, Studien zu Theognis in Philologus 48, 
49, 50. 


8 T. HUDSON WILLIAMS 


record we have of his reign refers to a step taken in their interests.* The 
fall of the tyrant was a great blow to the party; they failed to hold their 
own against the nobility, and lost all the privileges they had won. The 
nobles were still at the head of the state when Theognis began to write.*® 
In the poems that belong to this period he refers to the members of his 
party as citizens (ἀστοί) : the nobles he calls ἡγεμόνες. In elegy 39-42 he 
praises his own comrades, the ἀστοί, addresses a solemn warning to the 


ἡγεμόνες and expresses his fear that the conduct of the latter will lead to a 


tyranny.’ After this, Theognis quarrelled with his political friends and 
went over to the aristocracy, whose cause he took up with the greatest 
enthusiasm. Henceforth he appears as the mouthpiece of the most exclusive 
caste-feeling, his old companions are to him no longer ‘citizens,’ but the 
‘bad,’ of κακοί, for that is the name he now applies to them. He speaks of 
them in tones of bitter hatred and advises his young friend not to associate 
with them or attend their gatherings (6.9. vv. 31-36). The nobles were still 
in power when the poet changed sides.**. The expenses of the war with 
Athens and the loss of Salamis almost ruined the nobles; for as the in- 
dustrial class was not called upon to defend the state against her enemies,*® 
the brunt of the fighting fell on the aristocracy, their land was laid waste, 
their foreign trade ruined, and their coffers drained by the expenses of a war 
which they alone had to meet, while their political opponents were allowed 
to pursue their trade undisturbed and rapidly amassed princely fortunes by 
the sale of arms. The κακοί now felt themselves strong enough to demand a 
share in the government: they were successful in their demands and received 
a share in the administration of the law. Cauer sees a reference to this in 
Theog. v. 60 which he translates: ‘und kannte weder die Rechtspriiche der 
Edlen noch die der Gemeinen.’ Finally they practically deprived the nobles 
of all power and ruled the state with a rod of iron, stifling all opposition and 
driving their critics to seek refuge in riddles and parables (Th. 667-682). 
The next change was brought about by the revolt of the population of the 
country districts; their condition had been one of extreme poverty and they 
had derived no benefit from the events described above. They now rose 


35 ¢ Allerdings scheint es, dass Theagenes sich 
auf jenen Stand gestiitzt hat. Denn das einzige, 
was von seiner Regierung erzahlt wird, der Bau 
einer Wasserleitung (Paus. 1, 40, 41) lag im 
Interesse der stiidtischen Bevélkerung’ (p. 31). 

36 ‘Noch an einigen Stellen bei Theognis 
erscheint der Adel als der allein herrschende 
Stand’ (p. 32). 

37 What reason had a member of this middle- 
class party to view the rise of a tyrant with 
fear? Jt was the fall of a tyrant that had 
ruined their prospects, The devoted adherent 
of a party that owed all its power and pros- 
perity to the tyrant Theagenes would not be so 
horrified at the thought of a return to their 


former glories. 

38 9 Diese (31-36) Stellen sind geschriehen, ehe 
die Gemeinen [of κακοί] die politische Macht 
errungen hatten, welche ihnen Theognis nicht 
gonnte.’ , 

39 *Sie waren nicht verpflichtet—oder nicht 
berechtigt—zum Kriegsdienste ’ (Ρ. 29) : a state- 


ment which Cauer endeavours to prove by the. 


help of Theognis 865-868. Is it likely that 
any state would keep such a large section of the 
population in idleness at a crisis which threat- 
ened its very existence ? 

40 « Faktisch waren sie eine Zeit lang die 
herrschende Partei . .. Diese Partei iibte einen 
solchen Terrorismus aus,’ u.s.w. p. 31. 


THEOGNIS AND HIS POEMS. 9 


en masse, took the town by storm, and established a democracy. It is to this 
revolution that Theognis refers in vv. 53-60. 

Plausible as the above theory may appear, it is senpoablber to accept it, 
mainly for the following reasons. Theagenes, we are told, came to power as 
champion of the industrial class. Of this statement no proof whatever is 
offered beyond a mere reference made by a tourist many centuries later to an 
aqueduct built at.the tyrant’s orders. It is much more probable that The- 
agenes came forward as the protector of the country popuiation, and we can 
appeal for support to the passage in the Politics already referred to (1305 a), 
for the attack on the fertile lands of the rich was evidently a bid for the 

Ν favour of the distressed peasants whose lands lay on the barren and unpro- 
ductive hillsides. It was easier to set up a tyranny in those old days, says 
Aristotle in the same passage, because the people lived on the land and were 
busy at work. Theagenes, like Pisistratus (with whom his name is mentioned 
more than once by Aristotle), probably did all in his power to help the 
peasant farmers and to keep them busy with their own private affairs on the 
land ; he had no wish to see them flocking into the towns. This policy he 
seems to have carried out with great success, for the country people remained 
on the land and kept aloof from politics till the time of Theognis (Th. 
vv. 53-60). 

It is hard to see how any reader of Theognis can for a moment believe 
that the poet ever changed sides in politics. Elegy 27-88 is the work of a 
man who has always been true to the creed taught to him in his childhood, 
and has never swerved in his allegiance to the only true faith. Such words 
could never have come from the lips of a man who had been guilty of the 
very offence he himself denounces, nor would he have had the assurance to 
speak in such self-confident tones to a pupil who had not yet forgotten the 
᾿ reproaches hurled at those he was now called upon to imitate and admire as 
᾿ the only possible saviours of society. 

Again, the language used by Theognis in Elegy 53-60 *! makes it quite 
clear that tle rule of the nobles was immediately followed by a democracy, 
and thus there is no room left for the assumed joint-rule of the aristocrats 
and the industrial class which led to the triumph of the latter. In referring 
to the revolution only two classes are mentioned by the poet, viz. ‘the good ’ 
and the new comers; and he describes the change by saying that the ‘good’ 

- are now ‘bad’ and the ‘bad’ ‘good.’ This can only mean that power was 
before held exclusively by the ‘good, (that is, the nobles) and that they lost 
it at one swoop : there was a complete reversal of positions. Cauer takes the 
term κακοί to denote the wealthy middle-class as distinguished from the 
nobles (ἀγαθοί) and the common people (δῆμος). Such a distinction does not 
exist. In vv. 57,58 we are told that the peasants are now eed and the 


a) 


ie Theo 53-60. καὶ νῦν εἴσ᾽ ἀγαθοί, Πολυπαΐδη" οἱ δὲ δ, ἐσθλοὶ 
χων, πόλις μὲν ἔθ᾽ ἥδε πόλις, λαοὶ δὲ τὸ ἄλλοι" νῦν δειλοί: τίς κεν ταῦτ᾽ ἀνέχοιτ᾽ ἐσορῶν ; 
᾿ οὗ πρόσθ᾽ οὔτε δίκας ἤδεσαν οὔτε νόμους, ἀλλήλους δ᾽ ἀπατῶσιν ἐπ᾿ ἀλλήλοισι γελῶντες, 
ὶ ; barat δορὰς αἰγῶν κατέτριβον, οὔτε κακῶν γνώμας εἰδότες οὔτ᾽ ἀγαθῶν. 
᾿ ὥ mesnted! ἐνέμοντο πόλεος, Ρ 


10 T. HUDSON WILLIAMS 


‘good’ are δειλοί, and δειλοί, as Cauer himself admits, can only refer to the 
commons who have now acquired political rights? In Theognis the two 
terms κακοί and de:Ao/ are constantly interchanged and used as synonyms, 
just as ἀγαθοί and ἐσθλοί are used indifferently to denote the nobles; ef. 
101, 2.4% In another version“ of the elegy we are now discussing (53-60) 
κακοί is substituted for δειλοί, but I should not be inclined to lay much stress 
on this point, as the second version is evidently the work of a person who 


intentionally changed the order of the words in the first. As a political 


term Theognis uses κακοί without distinction for all who are not of good 
birth, and also for those who desert the ἀγαθοί and join the other side. 
κακῶν in v. 60 must refer to the same persons as δειλοί of ὅδ," and v. 60 
means ‘they do not know the distinguishing marks of “good” and “bad” 
men,’ that is, they do not know how to behave in their new position ; although 
they have assumed the role of ἀγαθοί they still conduct themselves like 
κακοί." : 

Nor can we accept Cauer’s interpretation of 39—42, though he is partly 
‘supported by most editors of Theognis, who assume that the poet is here 
protesting against the violence of his own colleagues in the aristocratic 
party. In vv. 41, 42 the blame is attached to the ἡγεμόνες, and by this 
Theognis must mean the ‘leaders’ of the masses, for he never blames the 
nobles, nor is it likely that he would use the word κακότης in referring to the 
conduct of the dyaOoi.48 The elegy was written when the commons had 
already seized political power, but had not yet begun to use it in their own 
interests. So far they are ‘prudent, but they are not likely to remain so, 
as their leaders are egging them on. It is these demagogues who ‘give the 
masses copious draughts of the wine of liberty’ that are made responsible for 
the excesses of the democracy by Aristotle, Plutarch, and Theognis himself. 


Ὁ Philologus 50, p. 534, ‘Darum klagt Theo- 
gnis, dass die Plebs die Stelle der edlen Ge- 
schlechter einnimmt und die Edlen zu Gemeinen 
geworden sind. ... von den κακοί, den wohl- 
habenden Biirgern, ist 57 noch keine Rede: 
erst 60 werden sie erwihnt und von der eben 

zur Herrschaft gelangten Menge ausdriicklich 
untersebieden.’ 

43 Μηδεὶς σ᾽ ἀνθρώπων πείσῃ κακὸν ἄνδρα 

φιλῆσαι, 
Κύρνε' τί δ᾽ ἔστ᾽ ὄφελος δειλὺς ἀνὴρ φίλος 
ὧν ; 

44 Theog. 1109-1114. 

Κύρν᾽, of πρόσθ᾽ ἀγαθοὶ viv αὖ κακοί, of δὲ κακοὶ 
πρὶν 

νῦν ἀγαθοί: τίς κεν ταῦτ᾽ ἀνέχοιτ᾽ ἐσορῶν ; 

% 57 ἀγαθοί... οἱ δὲ πρὶν ἐσθλοί | νῦν δειλοί 

1109 οἱ πρόσθ᾽ ἀγαθοὶ νῦν αὖ κακοὶ, οἱ δὲ κακοὶ 
πρὶν | νῦν ἀγαθοί. ; 

59 ἀπατῶσιν.... γελῶντες. 

1118 ἀπατῶντες. .. γελῶσιν. 

60. οὔτε κακῶν... οὔτ᾽ ἀγαθῶν. 


1114 οὔτ᾽ ἀγαθῶν... οὔτε κακῶν. 

46 In spite of his carefully-drawn distinctions 
Cauer translates δειλοί and κακοί here by the 
same word die Gemeinen. 

47 Liddell and Scott quote v. 60 s.v. γνώμη Ξε 
‘token, mark.’ 

48 39-42; 

Kupve, κύει πόλις ἥδε, δέδοικα δὲ wh τέκῃ ἄνδρα 
εὐθυντῆρα κακῆς ὕβριος ἡμετέρη». 

ἀστοὶ μὲν γὰρ ἔθ᾽ οἵδε σαόφρονες, ἡγεμόνες δὲ 
τετράφαται πολλὴν ἐς κακότητα πεσεῖν. 
43-52: 

Οὐδεμίαν πω, Kipv’, ἀγαθοὶ πόλιν ὥλεσαν ἄνδρες" 
ἀλλ᾽ ὅταν ὑβρίζειν τοῖσι κακοῖσιν ἅδῃ, 

δῆμόν τε φθείρωσι, δίκας τ᾽ ἀδίκοισι διδῶσιν 
οἰκείων κερδέων εἵνεκα καὶ κράτεος, 

ἔλπεο μὴ δηρὸν κείνην πόλιν ἀτρέμ᾽ ἔσεσθαι, 

᾿ μηδ᾽ εἰ νῦν πολλῇ κεῖτα' ἐν ἡσυχίῃ, 

εὖτ᾽ ἂν τοῖσι κακοῖσι φίλ᾽ ἄνδρασι ταῦτα γένηται, 
κέρδεα δημοσίῳ σὺν κακῷ ἐρχόμενα. 

ex τῶν yap στάσιές τε καὶ ἔμφυλοι φόνοι ἀνδρῶν 
μούναρχοί 0 ἃ πόλει μήποτε τῇδε ἅδοι. 


" Του, Ἢ" = 
eg νεῖ "5 4 . ᾿ = 
τ on, > ’ 


THEOGNIS AND HIS POEMS. 11 


The two elegies 39—42, 43--52 are exactly parallel and describe one and 
the same state of affairs. In the second we are told that ‘good men never 
ruined a state,’ but where the ‘ bad’ are lawless and give suits to the unjust 
[this proves that the bad are already in power] and sacrifice the public weal 
to private gain, that state will soon be ruined, though it may now be enjoying 
perfect quiet: for the lawlessness of the ‘bad’ leads to strife, murder, and 
tyranny. The κακοί of the second elegy are the ἡγεμόνες of the first: in 
both elegies they are accused of ὕβρις. ἀστοὶ μὲν yap ἔθ᾽ οἵδε caddpoves = 
μηδ᾽ εἰ viv πολλῇ κεῖται ἐν ἡσυχίῃ. In both elegies the poet fears a tyrant 
may be chosen to direct the people in their attacks on the nobles, just as, 
half a century before, Theagenes led them against the landowners, and this 
is what I take to be the meaning of line 40, ‘a man to steer or guide the 
lawlessness in our state.’ “Ὁ 

I suggest the following as a probable account of what occurred at 
Megara during the life-time of Theognis. After the expulsion of Theagenes 
the nobles ruled the state and refused to give their fellow-citizens any share 
in the government. This exclusiveness on their part led to the formation of 
a temporary alliance between the town population including the rich manu- 
facturers and merchants of the middle class and the distressed peasants of 
the country districts. There was a revolution, and a democracy was estab- 


lished. Before long there was a split in the coalition, for the masses, at the ᾿ 


instigation of their leaders, attacked the richer citizens without regard for 
party considerations, and passed measures depriving them of a great part of 
their property. The nobles and richer middle class were now drawn together 
by community of interests, and a new political party was formed; marriages 
between members of the old nobility and the richer citizens of the middle- 
class became frequent, and distinctions of birth tended to disappear altogether. 
Some of the nobles still held aloof and looked upon the breaking-down of 
social barriers with dismay. Theognis can see no hope of safety for the state 
except in a return to the good days when the nobles were supreme, and he 
protests with great bitterness against the contamination of nobility by inter- 
marriage with the ‘bad’ and ‘low.’ But he was the prophet of a lost cause, 
for self-interest and their common losses brought the nobles and richer 
_ citizens closer and closer together; great numbers of both classes had their 
property confiscated and were driven into exile. Finally they returned 
together with an army, attacked the disorganised democrats, and defeated 
them. A new constitution was drawn up in which political privileges ® were 
shared by all who had taken part in the restoration of the exiles. 


* Cf. εὐθυντὴρ ofat Aesch. Suppl. 717. ὑβριστήν, χαλεπῆς ἡγεμόνα στάσιος, 

‘This elegy (39-42) occurs a second time in ἃ reading which is still more favourable to the 
the collection (1081 sqq.) where pompancs v.40 explanation here suggested. . 

. ered... ; 5 Aristotle 1300 a. 


12 T. HUDSON WILLIAMS 


Il. 
The Arrangement of the Poems. 


The Theognidea, as we possess them, consist of two books; the second of 

these, which deals exclusively with the love of beautiful boys, is found only in 
one MS. (Mutinensis 10th cent.),°! and is certainly not the work of Theognis 
himself. The first book contains a very great amount of foreign matter, and 
must be very different from what passed under the name of Theognis in the 
days of Plato and Isocrates. Many attempts have been made to discover some 
general plan or method in the arrangement of the poems. The whole 
collection is not arranged according to subject-matter, nor is there any 
. reason to suppose, as some have suggested, that the poems were once 
arranged in alphabetical order. Of all the theories advanced the most 
plausible is perhaps the catchword theory, which was first suggested with 
extreme caution by Welcker in his edition of Theognis (1826), was afterwards 
worked out in detail and stoutly upheld by Nietzsche,* further exemplified, 
sharply criticized and modified, but still accepted in part by Fritzsche,°* and 
has received the qualified approval of one of the greatest authorities on the. 
subject, J. Sitzler, who has given us the best equipped and most compre- 
hensive edition of the poems.*° 

It will be convenient to take Nietzsche’s article as the basis of our 

investigation. Before introducing his own theory, he denies that there is 
any trace of arrangement according to subject-matter: ‘the poems are not 
even gathered together under special headings, as for instance, περὶ φίλων, 
περὶ oivov’ (p. 170); a statement which is quite true so far as it refers to the 
collection taken as a whole, for we certainly do not find all the poems on one 
subject collected into a single group: but we can trace the sequence of 
thought in many parts of the collection, and we often come across a series of 
several poems dealing with the same topic,*® and, as we shall see, one 
section *’ of the book is very carefully put together, with opening prayers, 
general introduction, headings, subheadings, and epilogue: and it is this 

very section which gives the best support to Nietzsche’s theory. He states 
his theory as follows: ‘Our collection then is not arranged according to 
subjects or letters of the alphabet, but according to words [or expressions]. 


51. 1231-1889 with the title ἐλεγείων B’. The closely connected in subject-matter. 
same MS. gives to the first book (1-1220) the 53 Rheinisches Musewm, 1867, p. 161-177. 


title θεόγνιδος ἐλεγείων α΄, 

52 Though every reader of the book must 
have been struck by the occurrence of several 
successive elegies beginning with the same 
letter (e.g. 78, 75, 77, 79: 611, 615, 617: 619; 
621, 623), the cases are not numerous enough 
to justify us in assuming such an arrangement 
for the whole collection; and besides, this 
would necessitate the separation of elegies 


δὲ Philologus xxix. pp. 526-546. 

55 Theognidis Reliquiae, 1880. 

56 ¢,.g. 155-72 seven poems on the uncer- 
tainty of human affairs, 467-510 conviviality, 
971-1012 ten poems on conviviality, 1039- 
1048 conviviality, 1082c-1102 eight poems on 
friendship. 

57 1-254, 


»υυ: 


THEOGNIS AND HIS POEMS. ‘3 


The fragments are linked together by catchwords, so that we find the same 
word [or similar expressions] in every pair of adjacent poems.’ ** After stating 
his theory he proceeds to discuss two sets of exceptions, which he labels (1) 
‘apparent’ and (2) ‘real.’ ‘Sometimes in the three consecutive elegies abc, 
we find a catchword connecting a with c, but none to connect a with b, or b 
with c. Here the exception is only apparent, for in such cases we must, 
according to Nietzsche, assume that ‘b is not a separate elegy, but a part of 
either ἃ ΟΥ ον ἢ Before accepting this canon without any limitations we should 
first prove the existence of the catchword principle in the rest of the collection, 
and even then we should not be justified in combining two totally distinct 
‘poems, in defiance of all probability and possibility, merely because the 
combination will supply a missing link in the chain of catchwords. Nothing 
but a blind adherence to the catchword theory could induce any man to join 
such poems as 959-62 and 963-70, or 181-2 and 183-8. 

Next come the ‘ real’ exceptions. According to Nietzsche, every break 
in the series of catchwords is due to an omission in our manuscripts. When 
the editor of the ‘last edition’ of the poems (ze. the catchword edition) was 
unable to find a suitable catchword, he went back to poems he had already 
incorporated in his collection, selected one that supplied the required links, 
and inserted it a second time. Later copyists, thinking these repeated poems 
superfluous, omitted many of them. There is not the remotest foundation 
for this extraordinary theory. The object of the repetition of poems, we are 
told, is to supply catchwords. A glance at the repeated poems will show us 
that in most cases they have no catchwords at all to connect them with their 
neighbours. Nietzsche’s remedy for this is more repetition : if a repeated poem 
does not give us a catchword, he adds another poem. Take away the 
repeated poem, and frequently we can find fairly good catchwords to join 
the poems for whose special benefit the repeated elegy is supposed to have 
been brought in. The following may serve as instances of the failure of 
Nietzsche’s explanation of these repeated poems.” 

Most of the repeated poems occur massed together in groups near ™ the end 
of the book. Between 1080 and 1083 come two poems of four lines each that 
have occurred before (39-42, 87-90). They have no catchwords to conuect 
them with one another or with the preceding and succeeding poems. To up- 
hold the catchword theory here, Nietzsche had to assume that these repetitions 
originally included eight more lines, which he arranged thus: 87-92; 
93-100 forming one poem with 1083, 4 which he considered to have once 


ὅδ *Unsere Sammlung ist also weder nach 
Gedanken noch nach Buchstaben geordnet. 
Wohl aber nach Worten. Nach Stichworten 
sind die Fragmente an einander gereiht, so 
dass je zwei Fragmente ein gleiches oder 
iihnliches Wort gemein haben.’ p. 171.-_ 
59 P. 171. The elegies are not divided in our 
_ best MSS., so that we have no good manuscript 
_ tradition to guide us in making our divisions. 
® In Bergk-Hiller-Crusius’ Anthologia all the 


repeated poems are printed exactly as they 
stand in the text of the best manuscript. Other 
editors generally content themselves with a 
reference in the notes. 

61 Only three repetitions occur before 1038; 
all the rest (excepting half a dozen in the 
Paedica) occur between 1038 and 1185. 

62 Lines 93, 4 are not repeated here in the 
MSS., although Bekker and Bergk ? state that 
they are. 


14 . T. HUDSON WILLIAMS 


been the closing couplet of 93-100. All this manipulation still leaves us 
with a gap at each end of the group of repetitions (i.e. before 1081 and 
after 1084). Leave out the repeated poems, and we immediately get a 
catchword ἐσθλόν (1079, 1083). 

Between 1160 and 1163 we have three repetitions: these have no 
catchwords. Nietzsche joined the first repetition to the preceding poem (an 
impossible combination) and so found a catchword for the second repetition in 
1157.8 The next entry in his scheme is ‘ Liicke, which means that he 
failed to connect the third repetition with the two adjoining poems. Omit 


the three repetitions and we get catchwords that would certainly satisfy 


Nietzsche, θυμόν (1160) = νόος (1163). 

Between 1164 and 1165 we have two poems repeated (97—100 
415—418). In subject they are closely connected with the following 
couplets (1165 sqq.) With 1163, 4 they have no connection whatever. To 
make them fit in with his theory, Nietzsche added two more lines (95, 6), to the 
first, and to connect the second of the repeated elegies with what follows, he 
was compelled to form one poem out of three separate couplets (1165 —1170). 
The poems are repeated, he says, to provide a catchword. Even granting 
that we may have to introduce two poems to get the required links, what 
reason could there possibly be for repeating two poems with the same 
catchword, as ἑταῖρον (1164 a, i164 f)? Some repetitions have no catch- 
words at. all, 49. 1104 a—1106, 1109—1114, 1038 ab. Others have ἃ 
catehword joining them forwards or backwards but not both ways, eg. 
1114 ab, 332 ab, 509,510. There is only one case of a repeated poem 
with satisfactory catchwords (643—4). It is thus quite clear that the 
repetitions give us no help in proving the catchword arrangement; indeed it 
would be far more plausible to maintain that the poems were first arranged 
according to catchwords and that the series was then broken in many places 
by the insertion of repeated poems. 

Nietzsche’s theory fails to account for the position of the repeated 
passages which he assumes to have been omitted in the later manuscripts. 
The editor, he tells us, went back® to what he had already used. In 
Nietzsche’s scheme ® we have several gaps between 128 and 145; these 
cannot be filled by using any poems from 1—128: and again, contrary to his 
own rule, he adds 1179 after 172, and after 208 he suggests the insertion of 333. 
As a rule Nietzsche does not specify the poems that are to fill the gaps, but 
Fritzsche has endeavoured to do so, and in his scheme 15 of the first 16 gaps, 
and 31 of the first 40, are filled with poems taken from later parts of the 
book. If we accept the theory, we must assume that the later copyists, on 
noticing the repetition of any poem in the manuscript, often left it in where 
it occurred for the second time, and went back and crossed it out where 


᾿ 83 This couplet (1157-8) is not found in the for the poems that deal with the same subject. 
MSS. of Theognis, but has been inserted from 6 « Er griff zuriick zu den schon gebrauchten ’ 
Stobaeus. Pssgmenien] p- ὅ7ς 
δ. Here as elsewhere catchwords can be found, δὺ p. 178, 


ΞΎ- 


THEOGNIS AND HIS POEMS. 15 


it first occurred, a supposition which is absurd. Poems which occur twice in 
the earlier MSS. are found in one place only in some of the later MSS., and 
it is always the repetition which is omitted.” 

‘The older our MS.’, says Nietzsche, ‘ the greater the number of repeti- 


tions it contains’; that is a fact ; therefore, he argues, a MS. older than the 


oldest we possess will contain still more repetitions, and so on until we arrive 
at an original MS. which contained all the repeated poems and an unbroken 
series of catchwords. This’ argument will not hold, because the number of 
repetitions we must assume to have dropped out in the earlier stages of the 
history of our text is far too great. The difference between the number of 
repetitions in our oldest MS. (A. 10th century) and the 15th century Paris C 68 


_ consists of less than forty lines. To account for the 112 gaps in Fritzsche’s 


arrangement,” we must assume that at least 224 lines have been omitted in 
the interval of five centuries” that elapsed between the copying of the 
original MS. and our tenth century A. 

When a poem is repeated in the MSS., it is often given in a totally differ- 
ent form, so that we may almost consider it as a different poem : 7! sometimes 
the difference is but slight. Nietzsche endeavours to explain the variants by 
assuming that the editor purposely changed the reading merely for the sake 
of variety. But the changes are frequently far too serious” to be thus 
explained away and point to the existence of several rival versions of the 
poems. A good argument against his theory is furnished by 877,8, an 
elegy which begins with ἥβα wo (or ἡβώοις, for the reading is not quite 
certain, but there is no doubt that the first word is some form of the root 
78—). After 1070, where the couplet again occurs, all the MSS. that 
contain the repetition read τέρπεό μοι, although 8a is the very word 
required as a catchword (τ ἥβης 1070). Here Nietzsche and Fritzsche 
quite ignore the testimony of the MSS. and quietly insert the reading 
of 877. 

Nietzsche has taken four sections of the poems and endeavoured to 
arrange them according to catchwords. Jn the first section (1—260), he has 
been fairly successful in finding similar words or phrases in neighbouring 
poems. In the second and third sections (419-510, 855-1216), the catch- 
words are not so satisfactory, he has taken more unwarrantable liberties with 
the text, and the catchword connection is broken more frequently. In the 
last section (1235—1389), the poems all deal with the same topic (musa 
paedica), and accordingly supply more or less satisfactory catchwords.”* 


87 ¢.g. A alone repeats 209, 10 after 332, all 
the other MSS. have it in the first place only. 

58. We must remember that the repeated 
poems are not the only things omitted in the 
younger MSS. e.g. 937, 8 are omitted in 10 MSS. 

6% Fritzsche has arranged the whole coHection 
according to catchwords, and though he uses 


very simple and common words, his scheme 


still contains 112 gaps. Cf. p. 543 ‘In den 370 


Fragmenten sind 112 Liicken der Stichwortver- 
bindung.’ 

70 Nietzsche dates our collection between 433 
A.D. and Stobaeus. 

71 Cf. 53-60 and 1109-1114. 

72 Occasionally they are too trivial. 

73 Generally some form of g:A- or ép(@) and 
ὦ παῖ. 


Ce δος 


΄ 


16 ; T. HUDSON WILLIAMS 


We shall now consider Nietzsche’s arrangement of the first section. 

First come four elegies addressed to the gods. In 1—4, 5—10, Apollo 
is invoked, Artemis in 11—14, and the Muses and Graces in 15—18. It is 
easy enough to find a catchword to connect them with one anothier. 
Nietzsche’s series is 1—10, Διὸς τέκος, 11—14 θύγατερ Διός, 15—18 κοῦραι 
Avos—éros. By taking 1—10 as one poem he has secured three almost 
identical expressions, but 1-10 are two poems, and are printed as such by 
all the editors.” 

Are we to believe with Nietzsche that toss elegies are placed next to one 
another merely because they contain similar expressions? In poems on the 
same subject we can almost always find similar words or expressions, and where 
the poems are arranged according to subject-matter, Nietzsche has not much 
difficulty in drawing up his scheme ; but as we shall prove, his theory breaks 
down completely where we have a rapid succession of elegies on different 
subjects. In this first section (1-260) the poems have ben: very carefully 
arranged and those on the same subject and even on the different aspects of 
the same subject are grouped together. And this is how it is so easy to 
find catchwords in this section, the only part of the book which lends 
even a shadow of support to the theory. 

I am inelined to look on the greater part of this first section (7.e. 1-254) 
as a little collection of Theognidea complete in itself. After the opening 
prayers we have first an introductory elegy (19-26) addressed to Cyrnus, 
giving the author’s name and method of composition. In 27-80, 31-88 he 
declares his intention of instructing Cyrnus in the ways of the ‘good, and 
states his general maxim or text, ‘always associate with the “good” and 
avoid the “bad.”’ He then (89-42, 43-52, 53-68) proceeds to discuss the 
political situation, and shews how the ‘bad’ are responsible for the ruin of 
the state: the poet’s young friend is told how to conduct himself under the 
new régime, and is warned against making friends of the new masters of 
the city. 69-128 are all on the subject of friendship ; 69-72 ‘make friends 
of the good’: 73-86 five elegieS on the scarcity of faithful friends; 87-100 
tell us what a friend ought to be and ought not to be: 101-114, three 
elegies on ‘ the “bad” as friends.’ 115-128 three elegies on the difficulty 
of distinguishing between true and false friends. As we have sixteen poems 
(538-128) so closely connected in subject it will be easy to find some word 
denoting ‘ friendship’ as catchword to connect them. And it is preciscly 
words of this kind that Nietzsche has used. In fact we can tell the subject- 
matters by merely glancing at the catchwords he uses.” 7 

He has the following scheme for 15-128. 

15-18 κοῦραι Διός- ἔπος : 19-30 ἔπη --ἀἁνδάνει: 31-38 ἅνδανε : 39-52 
sd eee ane 53-60 ἥδε πόλις--ἀπατῶσιν: 61-68 ἀπάτας---σπουδαῖον: 


LE  —— μμμν.. 


741-4 is ead in itself and 5-10 is (Λητώ) θεά 11-14 θεά- ae Διός. 
probably a fragment of ἃ Delian hymn, and 75 e.g, some form of mor- (πίσυνος) occurs in 
was very likely inserted as a parallel to the every one of the six poems 53-86 (taking 79-86 
first elegy. Fritzsche keeps the poems apart 4s one poem). 
and his series is 1-4 ἄνα (Λητοῦς) 5-10 ἄναξ 7 P. 178. 


THEOGNIS AND HIS POEMS. 17 


69-72 σπουδαῖον---πρῆγμ᾽: 73-76 πρῆξιν---πιστός : 71--18 πιστός : 79-86 

 πιστούς---γλώσσῃ : 87-92 γλώσσῃ : 93-100 γλώσσῃ.---ἀνὴρ φίλος : 101-112 
ἀνὴρ φίλος: 113-114 ἄνδρα φίλον. --ἑταῖρον : 115-118 ἑταῖροι---κιβδήλου : 
119-128 κιβδήλου. 

The catchwords here often seem prettily arranged in groups of three. 
A mere glance at the text will shew us on what a flimsy foundation these 
series rest. Nietzsche takes 19-30 as one poem: but 19-26 is complete in 

itself and will not bear the addition. As ἁνδάνει occurs in 26, it is no 
longer at our disposal: we cannot follow Nietzsche in joining 39-42 
to 43-52; so ἅδῃ (44) is also disposed of. We must now look for new 
w catchwords. Fritzsche has’* 19-26 ἔπη---σοφιζομένῳ : 27-30 πέπνυο--- 
a ἔμαθον: 31-8 μαθήσεαι---κακοῖσιν : 39-42 κακῆς-- πόλις ἥδε: 43-52 
; πόλει τῇδε. 

The second group of three (πιστός) has been secured by joining 73,4 to 
75,6, a combination which is not impossible, but had it suited Nietzsche's 
purpose he could with equal appropriateness have joined 75,6 to 77,8, or if 
necessary have formed one continuous poem of 69-86. Besides those given 
by Nietzsche numerous other catchwords can be found to connect these 
groups, for here, as elsewhere, similarity of thought implies similarity of 
expression. In the third group of three, the first member γλώσσῃ dis- 
appears if we follow BHC in keeping 87,8 apart from 89-92. The next 
group of three keeps together only if we print 93-100, 101-12 as two 
poems. Even if we follow BHC in the arrangement of 87-112 we can still 
find catchwords e.g. 87,8 φιλεῖς, νόος: 89-92 φίλει, νόον, γλώσσῃ: 
92-100 φίλος, γλώσσῃ: 101-4 φίλος, δειλός, κακόν, ἔχων: 105-12 
φιλότης, δειλούς, κακούς, ἔχουσι. 

Nietzsche is hardly justified in combining the two couplets 11,0, 
117,8; if we separate them, there is a break in the scheme of catchwords, 
unless we accept Fritzsche’s παυρότεροι = χαλεπώτερον. 

129-72 contain general remarks and reflections on human affairs, and 
deal with our relations towards the gods, and especially with our helplessness ; 
the dominant note is ‘all is chance! we know nothing.’ Nietzsche failed 
to find any catchwords to connect 129-45 (4 poems). Fritzsche offers 

such weak links as ἀνδρί and ἀνθρώποις. Rejecting these we must assume 
five gaps.*° 

For the next elegies Nietzsche has the very satisfactory series 146-8 

δ ἀρετή: 149-50 ἀρετή--- ἀνδρὶ δίδωσι: 151,2 ὥπασεν avipi—ifpw. His 
next poem is 153-8 ὕβριν---μήποτε. This combination is not possible, for 
the two parts (153,4, 155-8) have fo connection at all in subject. We 
now (’A@nv. Πολ. 12) that the couplet 153,4 belongs to Solon, and there 
is no reason for adding the next four lines to it. After 154 there is now 


he editors print these separately. 79 199-30 ἀνδρί; 131,2 ἀνθρώποισι; 133-42 
follow Bekker in printing 27-8, ἀνθρώπων ; 138,4 θνητῶν. 

3 two elegies » we then get four poems δ᾽ Unless we join the smaller elegies to form 

ν᾽ ord, one long poem. 


18 T. HUDSON WILLIAMS 


a gap in the catchword series. By the very questionable combination of 
159,60 and 161-4 Nietzsche avoids the gap that would otherwise occur 
after 160.8! Next we get 165,6 ὄλβιος : 167-70 ὄλβιος---Θεοί: 171,2 θεοῖς ; 
but we cannot follow him in forming one poem of the two couplets 167,8, 
169,70; this gives us a gap after 168.% 

After 172 there is a gap which Nietzsche fills by inserting 1179,80 
giving us catchwords θεούς---ὅρδειν. 173 starts with a new subject 
‘poverty’: we have here three poems on this subject, and the next poems 


183-208 deal with the contrary, ‘wealth’ and its‘influence. In Nietzsche’s — 


scheme 173-80 form a single poem (instead of two), and the next couplet 
(180,1) has been joined to the following poem (183-8) though the latter deals 
with a new subject. The catchwords are 173-80 ἕρξαι---δίζησθαι : 181-8 
διζήμεθα---κρήματα ὃ : 189-96 χρήματα: 197-208 χρήματα---φίλοισιν. 

Even if we reject Nietzsche’s combinations we can still find catchwords : 
173-8 πενίη, χρή: 119-80 πενίης, χρή, χαλεπῆς, Κύρνε: 181,2 πενίῃ, 
χαλεπῇ, Κύρνε. Then ἃ gap: 188-92 χρήματα: 192-6 χρήμασι: 197--208 
χρῆμα. This proves how easy it is to find ‘catchwords’ in poems on the 
same subject. : 

After 208 Nietzsche has a gap which he fills with 333,4 φιλήσῃς 
—fevyovt’. 209-36 consist of nine elegies containing maxims and 
reflections on various subjects. 237-54 forma closing elegy in which the poet 
tells Cyrnus of the fame he has won for him. After 210 there is a 
gap in Nietzsche’s scheme, and another after 212. To get rid of the 
difficulty he proposes to omit 211,2. Then he gives us 213,4. ὀργήν: 
215-20 ὀργήν (were it not for the recurrence of ὀργήν he would have taken 
213-8 as a single poem, a proceeding to which we could hardly object). It 
is Just these endless possible combinations that make it so easy to arrange 
the poems in this section according to catchwords. To avoid two gaps he 
has joined 215-8 to 219,20 (an impossible combination) and we get 
the series 215-20 ἀτροπίης: 221-6 ἄφρων: 227-382 ἀφροσύνη. His 
reason for joining 215-8 and 219,20 was to make up for the want of a 
catchword to connect them, and also to find a catchword (atpomins 218) to 
serve as a link with elegy 221-6. 


The next links are 233-6 κενεόφρονι---ὀλέγης τιμῆς ἔμμορεν : 237-54 
ὀλίγης τυγχάνω αἰδοῦς : 255-6 τυχεῖν---κάλλιστον : 257-60 καλή. The 
above series is far from convincing, for ἀφροσύνη and κενεόφρονι are not 
good catchwords, and the next two are twenty lines apart. 233-6 cannot 
form one poem, and if we keep the two couplets apart there will be a gap 


5! Unless we accept τελεῖ (160) = τέλος (164), the two parts of it. 

82 Unless we accept ἀνθρώπων (168) = ἀνδρός 84 As I have already said (p. 16), I consider 
(170). 1-254 to be a small collection of Theognidea 

83 B.H.C. print 183-192 as one poem: and complete in itself—other poems were-added to 
Nietzsche would have done so too were it not it later, orrather it was incorporated in a larger 
for the occurrence of a catchword χρήματα ἴη collection. 


THEOGNIS AND HIS POEMS. 19 


after 234 and another after 236, unless we take ἀνήρ (234) -- ἀνδράσι 
(235) = ἄνδρες (241). 

An examination of N ietzsche’s scheme shows us that we find the: most 
satisfactory catchwords in the groups of poems that deal with the same 
subject, the catchword generally being the very word we should naturally 
select as a heading for the section (¢g. φίλος, οἶνος, πλοῦτος) 5 And this is 
just what we should expect; similarity of thought necessarily implies simi- 
larity of language. Given a number of poems on ‘friendship’ or ‘con- 
viviality,’ we can generally find in each member of the group some word 
with the root-meaning ‘friend’ or ‘drink.’ We have also noticed that when 

” two poems supply us with a particularly good catchword 55 they are connected 
by something more important than a similar word, for they either contain 
exactly the same idea, or the second poem of a pair is a criticism, correction, 
or modification of the preceding elegy.’ One of the best catchwords in the 
whole book is κήβδηλος (117, 119), and the two elegies in which it occurs deal 
with exactly the same subject, viz. the difficulty of dete cting deceit in a friend. 
Something might be said for the catchword theory, if in neighbouring poems 
we frequently found a fairly striking similarity of expression but no connection 
in subject-matter. Occasionally we do find poems undoubtedly placed side 
by side on account of similarity of wording alone; but such cases are ex- 
tremely rare,** there are not half a dozen in the whole book. With very few 
exceptions we never get a good catchword except where we have similarity of 
subject: where there is a break in the sequence of ideas, we have generally 
either a very unsatisfactory catchword, or else a gap in the scheme. The 
_gaps are most numerous where the subjects change in rapid succession and 
- the poems are short; *® the longer elegies frequently supply us with some 


ary 


that would be ὁ. waste.’ ‘No!’ says 931-2 
‘save something to leave behind you, or else no 


85 Poems addressed to the gods are sure to 
contain words like θεός, ἀθάνατος, Διὸς τέκος. 


86 Sometimes two poems containing the same 
idea offer us no possible catchword. Here 
according to Nietzsche’s theory, we must 

> assume that an elegy has dropped out, and 
possibly we may have to break the sequence of 
thought by the insertion of a poem containing 
> suitable catehwords: ¢.g. Fritzsche inserted a 
poem on ‘poverty’ between the two closely- 
connected convivial elegies 1045-6, 1047-8. 

87 e.g, 719-28 are a reply to 699-718 ; 1003-6, 
1007-12 give the two sides of the same 
question. 931-2 suggest another solution of the 
problem discussed in 903-30. Nietzsche 

a arranges 903-932 as follows, 903-922, 923-932. 
Whether we take 903-930 as one poem or 
Moca probable) as two, 931-2 must 
ine leon taken by itself as a separate elegy. 
03-80 is, ‘spend rationally 
on in want while you 
g behind you, for 


one will mourn your death.’ 

88 Cf. 309, 313 ἐν μὲν συσσίτοισιν. .. 
μαινομένοις. Cf. 409, 411. 

89 ¢.g. 209-221: a group of maxims that may 
be labelled ‘ miscellaneous,’ with no catchwords 
at all. 260-302 : twelve poems (in Bekker) with 
seven gaps. The longer poems give us πάντα 
275 = πάντα 282, τιθεῖ 282 -- τιθεῖν 286. 523- 
596 : twenty-nine poems in Fritzsche’s arrange- 


ἐν μὲν 


*ment (80 in Bergk), with fifteen gaps. The 


catchwords in this last section are πλοῦτος ; 
two gaps ; φίλον (ποιιη)---φίλον (adj.) ; αὐλῶν --- 
αὐλητῆρος (same subject) ; 3 gaps ; τήνδε---τήνδε 
δίκην---δικαίῳ; gap; ἀνδρῶν---ἄνδρα ; gap; 
πόλλ᾽ ---πολλήν, χρημοσύνην--- χρήματα, ἔχειν--- 
ἔχων ἐσθλόν---ἐσθλός ; 4 gaps ; κακόν--- ἐχθαίρω 
κακὸν ἄνδρα---ἔχθαίρω ; 2 gaps (Nietzsche found 
catchwords, μάργον = ἀργά !) ; θεός, θεοί ; 32 gaps ; 
ef, 639-658 ; 843-856. 


20 T. HUDSON WILLIAMS 


word that may serve as link, 6.5. 1008 vom (verb),=1016 νόον (noun), ὥλεσε 
664 = ἀπόλωλεν 677, ἕρδουσι 675 = ἕρδειν 685. 

‘It is a fact, says Nietzsche in summing up, ‘that a great many of the 
fragments (more than half) are connected by catchwords; we therefore 
assume that the whole collection was arranged in this way.’ His fact is 
quite correct, but his conclusion by no means follows; it must first be shewn 
that the fragments are intentionally connected by catchwords, and this 
certainly cannot be proved. If in the term ‘catchword’ we are allowed to 
include simple and trivial words,” synonyms and homonyms™ that often 
bear only the faintest resemblance to one another in meaning or sound, 
without any distinction between the different parts of speech, however far 
apart * from one another the words may be; if, when it suits our purpose, 
we are allowed reasonable licence * in combining or cutting up poems dealing 
with the same subject ; if we are permitted to fill up any gaps that may still 
be left (provided their number does not exceed half the number of poems in 
the collection) by the insertion of poems that have been already used or 
occur later, we shall, with all these resources at our disposal, always be able 
to prove a catchword arrangement in any collection of poems of the nature of 
the Theognidea, and generally, I think, with far greater success than has 
attended the efforts of Nietzsche and Fritzsche in their schemes. Had the 
supposed ‘last editor’ of our sylloge really wished to arrange it on the 
principle assumed by Nietzsche, he could, with the materials at his disposal, 
have handed down the poems in a series containing comparatively few 
repetitions. As the range of the Theognidea is very narrow and the whole 


e.g. ταῦτα (1050), σοι (1049), ἔχειν (several 
times in Fritzsche’s scheme), τήνδε (541), ὁμῶς 
(495), ὥσπερ (449), οὐ (687), ἄλλος (796). 
. Fritzsche’s scheme has 112 gaps (370 poems) ; 
this number would be more than doubled if we 
refused to admit the very simple words he has 
used so often : ¢.g. some form of ἀνήρ (with its 
synonyms ἄνθρωπος and even θνητός) is used 
as connecting link 35 times, φίλος (or some 
form of φιλεῖν, &c.) 36, κακός 20, ἀγαθός 10, 
θεός 11, Κύρνε 9. Sometimes we have several 
words in two poems that would serve equally 
well as catchwords, and we find Nietzsche 
using one, and Fritzsche another. Fritzsche is 
far. more charitable than Nietzsche in admitting 
simple words. 

1 οἶνον = κωμάζοιμι (886); ἔβην = εἶμι (945); 
αἰσχρόν = ἀναλκείης (891); ἔργματα = ἔργον 
(901) ; σοφός = τοῖς συνιεῖσιν (904) ; ἀρετή = 
σοφίης (942) ; κλινόμενος = τρέψας (949) : all 
the above in a group of eleven poems ; δειλοῖς = 
ἄφρονες καὶ νήπιοι (1039) ; πέπονθα = ὀλοφύρο- 
μαι (1181). 
πίνωμεν (1048) ; μάργον = ἀργά (584); παυρό- 
τεροι = χαλεπώτερον (117); μὴ θαύμαζε = μὴ 
κώμαζε (1861) ; παρ᾽ ἄφροσι-- παρ᾽ ἀνδράσι (627) 


Similarity of sound: εὕδωμεν =. 


92 In a group of three poemsa, b, ὁ the catch- 
word joining b to a often comes near the end of 
b, while the catchword for c comes at the 
very beginning of Ὁ. [#.g. 659-66, 667-82, 
683-6, with their catchwords ὥλεσε (664), 
ἀπόλωλεν (677), ἕρδουσι (675), ἕρδειν (685). 1 
have noticed one instance where the catch- 
words are 25 lines apart (νικάτω 466 = ἀνίκητος 
491). 

% Nietzsche is often very unreasonable as we 
have seen. The catchword theory may prove 
fatal to sound criticism and do much to warp 
and corrupt our judgment when we endeavour 
to establish the text of Theognis and to deter- 
mine the exact length of each poem. We have 
already seen how Nietzsche’s theory leads us to 
join disconnected fragments : it also induces us 
to cut up single poems, or at any rate prevents 
us from combining two fragments that ought 
to form one poem. 903-930 may or may not 
be a single poem ; the question was settled for 
Nietzsche by the occurrence of rrwxever twice, 
and he printed the lines as two poems; had 
there been no catchword he would with equal 
confidence have printed them as one poem, 


‘THEOGNIS AND HIS POEMS. 


21 


collection may be included under the heads ‘ Ethics,’ ‘ Politics,’ ‘Conviviality,’ 
and ‘Love, the number of gaps in Fritzsche’s scheme is absurdly large, 
especially if we bear in mind the frequent use he has made of the simplest 
words in the Greek language. 

| Sitzler accepts the catchword theory in part: he holds that the poems 
are connected sometimes by similarity of thought, sometimes by similarity of 
wording, and very often by both. In his printed text he has marked the 
catchwords by wider spacing of the letters.* No one will deny that poems 
‘near one another® often contain the same word or-phrase, but we maintain 
that this is almost always due to similarity of thought or to mere chance, 
and chance can do much. 

To satisfy myself on this point, I took up the first collection of short 
poems I laid my hands on, and chance favoured my choice. They happened 
to be the poems of Asclepiades taken by their editor from here and there in 
the Palatine Anthology : they consist of 180 lines, made up of 38 poems (all 
elegies, except one), 25 of which contain 4 lines each, eight 6 lines, two 
8 lines, two 2 lines, and one 12 lines. Nos. 1-24 are on what may be 
called erotic subjects, 25-27 are convivial, 28-38 inscriptions and epitaphs. 
Without once resorting to Nietzsche’s device of combining different poems, I — 
managed, with only five gaps, to find a series of catchwords quite as satis- 
factory as those provided by Nietzsche in support of his theory.” It will 
be noticed that though we have so many poems on the same subject, the 
catchwords do not give us a clue to the subject as often as they do in 
Nietzsche and Fritzsche’s schemes. The following are the catchwords in 
my arrangement of Asclepiades. 
| 1. πτερά: 2. πτερά---αὐτή, "Ἔρωτα : 3. αὐτοῦ, ἐρώντων : 4. αὐτοῦ---μικρὸς 
᾿ Ἔρως: 5. νεογνὸς "Ἔρως---χρυσέην : 6. χρυσῷ---Ἔρως : 7. ἔρωτες---πάθω, ζῶν : 
ΜΝ 8, πάσχεις, ζῶν---Βάκχου ξωρὸν πόμα, δάκρυα, πουλύῦν, ἰδεῖν, μένομεν : 
; 9. οἶνος, ἐδάκρυσεν, πολλῇ, ἔβλεπε, ἔμενε---ἐρᾶν : 10. ἐρῶσι : gap to be filled 
5 by repeating elegy 2 "Ερωτα---ὥώμων: 11. ὦμων---βέλος : 12. τόξοις--- 
βούλομαι: 18. ἤθελε 3---Νικώ : 14. Νικαρέτης 8. φίλη: 15. φίλει---ἔχῃ : a 
gap to be filled by repeating 12 ἔχειν--ρωτες : 16. "Epwres—étowce, 
ἐπέβην: 17. ὑβρίζει, ἐλήλυθα---νύξ, ἐλήλυθα, προθύροις : 18. νύξ, ἤλυθες, 
θύρην---ἐρῶντι, μίαν: 19. διψῶντι, μία---φιλέοντας : 20. φιλέοντα--- 


wo 


% He uses the same licence as Nietzsche and "067. AL Hartung ; die griechischen Elegiker 


Fritzsche in his application of the term ‘ catch- 
word.’ 
% They need not necessarily be next to one 
ἢ another, for he often marks catchwords in 
’ poems separated from one another by one or 
more elegies ¢.g. παρέοντα (1151) = παροῦσι 
(1188) witha long poem 1135-50 between them, 
θείς (1269) = κριθῶν - ἐκορέσθη» 
th five poems between. There are so 
chwords in each poem, especially in 
reader is often quite lost in 


unter den ersten Ptolemdern, pp. 53-72. Leipzig 
1859. One of the poems is from the Fianedees 
Anthology. 

7 With 8 little more boldness in using 
‘synonyms’ I could reduce the pine of gaps 
to one. 

98. Cf. Nietzsche's δεινὰ παθών = ἀχνύμενος 
κῆρ (1114). 

99 Cf. N. σώφρων = 
ἀνίκητος (491). 

10 Similar sound cf. N. 
(1042). 


σύμφορον (457), νικάτω = 


εὕδωμεν = πίνωμεν 


22 T. HUDSON WILLIAMS 


Κύπριδος κεισόμεθα: 21. Κύπρι, κοίτης : 1°! 22. ἹΚύπρις---πυρός : 23. πυρί--- 
λάμπουσ᾽ : 34. φῶς πάρεχε---θεός : 25. θεός ---ζῆν : gap to be filled by repeat- 
ing 8. ζῶν---ἐληΐσατο: 26. λῃστήν---ῥοδίνων, AaB’, λογιούμεθα : 27. ῥοδίνους, 
λαβών, ἀριθμήσει---ῥοδίνους : 28. πορφυρέην---ζύπρι: 29. ΚΚύπρι---ἔθηκε: 
30. θήκατο---παῖδας : gap to be filled by repeating 1. παῖς---ΚΚύπριδος : 
31. Κύπριδος---εἰκών: 32. γλύμμα---χερὸς : 33. yepi—épya: 34. movos— 
ὄνομα: 35. οὔνομα---εἰμέ: gap to be filled by repeating 7 εἰμί---ἐτέων : 
36. ἐτῶν---ὀγδώκοντ᾽ : 37. ὀκτώ 155. τάφον : 38. Hpiov.1% 


Here, in a chance collection of 38 poems, we have a series of catchwords 


broken.only in 5 places. We should not be surprised then to find a chance 
collection of 370 poems connected by a series of catchwords with only 50 
gaps: in the Theognidea, even if we accept all the catchwords admitted by 
Fritzsche, we have 112 gaps, so we cannot believe that this principle of 
arrangement was ever applied to our sylloge. 

A slip on the part of Welcker is interesting as shewing the part chance 
can play in a case of this kind. In his Prolegomena, p. ev., he asserts that not 
infrequently (haud raro) poems have been placed next to one another owing 
to similarity of wording alone, and among other instances he adduces the 
couplets 1223, 4: 1225, 6: 1227, 8 (not included by BHC): they give good 
catchwords. But these three poems are not contained in any of our manu- 
scripts. 1223, 4, 1225, 6 are found in Stobaeus (20. 1: 67. 4) and were 
first inserted among the Theognidea by Vinet.%% 1227, 8 (Stob. 11. 1) were 
first put in by Grotius and not by Vinet as Nietzsche states (Rhein. Mus, 
p. 171). 

T. Hupson WILLIAMS. 


POSTSCRIPT. 


After accepting the above article, thé Editors of the Journal have asked me to add a 
short note with reference to Mr. E. Harrison’s recently published Studies in Theognis. 
My article had already been written and sent in before I saw Mr. Harrison’s book. On read- 
ing it through, I discovered that we hold divergent views on the fundamental principles 
on which my whole argument rests; but owing to want of space I cannot here defend 
my own views at greater length or discuss in detail any of the considerations raised by 
Mr. Harrison. I must content myself with a mere enumeration of the main points on 
which we differ. In the first part of my article I have stated my conviction that the mere 
occurrence of a poem in the Theognidea was not enough to justify us in ascribing that poem 
to Theognis. In proof I pointed to the presence, in the collection, of poems known to have 


“1 Cf. Nietzsche γνώσῃ = γνώμη (1172). 

12 Cf. N. udpyov = ἀργά (584). 

13 It will be observed that in filling up the 
gaps I have in each case used a poem that has 
already occurred in the collection, in no case 
have I had to adopt Fritzsche’s practice of 
taking poems that occur later. 

14 In his edition of Theognis (1543) Vinet 


has the following note: ‘et hos sex uersus 
(1221-6) ex loan. Stobaei Apophtheg. adleci- 
mus; quos ad hoc Theognidis poema referendos 
esse, uel Cyrni nomen satis arguit. Tenebunt 
autem postremum hunc locum, donec dexteriore 
aliquanto numine, suo tandem restituti fuerint ’ 
10% Cambridge University Press, 1902. ~ 


» - >. 


THEOGNIS AND HIS POEMS. 23 


been composed by other poets, and suggested the necessity of discovering some test which 
would reveal the real Theognis : this I found in an elegy of the poet’s own making (19-26). 
At the beginning of II, I declared our Theognis to be quite different from the Theognis of 
Plato and Isocrates, emphatically rejected the claims of the ‘Second Book,’ and referred 
to the repetitions as ‘rival versions’ of the same poems. On all these points we differ. 
On the merits of the catchword theory we are in substantial agreement, and we have both 
adopted the same method of testing it. Mr. Harrison has examined the schemes of Miiller: I 
preferred to take those of Nietzsche, as they afforded me an opportunity of discussing the 
repetitions at the same time. We both regard Megara Nisaea as the poet’s home, but 
differ by half a century on the question of date. Mr. Harrison’s book is in many ways, 
especially on matters of textual criticism, a well-timed protest against the anarchy of 
German and Dutch scholars, and is undoubtedly a valuable contribution to the literature 
of Theognis ; but on the main question the author has taken up a position which is quite 
untenable, and he has failed to justify the extreme conservatism of his attitude. The best 
description of the book is contained in the first sentence of the Preface: ‘In this book I 
make bold to maintain that Theognis wrote all or nearly all the poems which are extant 
under his name.’ At the beginning of my article I referred to the presence among the 
Theognidea of poems from Tyrtaeus, Mimnermus, and Solen. Mr. Harrison’s second chapter 
is entitled ‘The Methods of Modern Criticism,’ and the first part (pp. 100-120) deals with 
these poems. The author believes that Theognis published them as his own. ‘Sometimes 
Theognis merely appropriates the lines of other poets, with only slight changes ; sometimes 
he incorporates them in his own work ; sometimes he gives them a new application by 
putting them in a new context ; sometimes he makes a vital change’ (p. 112). Even if 
this explanation is correct, we are still by no means sure of the real Theognis ; for we are 
confronted with a new difficulty which Mr. Harrison does not appear to have foreseen. A 
very small portion of early elegiac Greek poetry has survived the attacks of time: small as 
these remnants are, they still include nine pieces ‘borrowed’ by Theognis. Are we not 
therefore justified in assuming that the recovery of all the lost poems of the three poets 
and their contemporaries would lead to the detection of a great number of ‘revised’ or 
‘borrowed’ poems in the book of Theognis? And how are we to distinguish these from 
those which he could justly call his own? We should still have to fall back on the Κύρνε 
test and the internal evidence of the poems themselves. 


Universiry CoLLEGE oF Norru WALEs, BANGOR. 
December 12, 1902, 


THE CULTS OF OLBIA. 
Part IT. 


(Continued from Vol. XXII, p. 267). 


Aphrodite. 


NEITHER literature nor coins bear any witness to the cult of Aphrodite 
at Olbia, but we have an inscription! which is of the highest interest. 


[Αφρο]δέτηι Εὐπλοίαι 
[Ποσ]έδεος Ποσιδείου 
χαριστήριον. 

This inscription is of the first century after Christ ; Posideos the son of 
Posideos is no doubt the same individual who dedicated offerings at Neapolis ” 
to Zeus Atabyrios, Athene Lindia, and ᾿Αχιλλεῖ νήσου [μεδέοντι]. Boeckh® 
conjectures him to have been a Rhodian, no doubt because of the dedications 
to Athené Lindia and Zeus Atabyrios, and also because Aphrodite Euploia 
was worshipped at Cnidus. 

This inscription is most important, because the epithet Εὔπλοια is so 
very rare. Pausanias‘ in describing the temple to Aphrodite built by Conon 
in the Peiraeus, near the sea, in honour of his naval victory off Cnidus, says 
there were three temples of Aphrodite at Cnidus: νεώτατον δὲ ἣν Κνιδίαν 
οἱ πολλοί, Κνίδιοι δὲ αὐτοὶ καλοῦσιν Εὔπλοιαν" Pausanias does not say 
. that Conon’s temple atthe Peiraeus was dedicated to Aphrodite Εὔπλοια, but 
an inscription discovered in the Peiraeus makes this probable. (We have 
no epigraphic authority for the title Εὔπλοια as early as the time of 
Conon). The inscription ὁ reads— 


᾿Αργεῖος ᾿Λργείου Τρικο[ρύσιος] 
στρατηγήσας ἐπὶ rou Πειρα[ιἃ] 
᾿Αφροδίτει Εὐπλοίαι τύχῃ ἀγαθῇ 1] 


ἀνέθηκεν. 
1 Latyschey, i. 94.. 5 Note that Farnell (Gk. Cults, ii. p. 689) 
3 Latyschev, i. 242, 243, 244, supports the view that the Cnidian statue by 
3. O.1.G. ii, 2103 b. Praxiteles represented Aphrodite E#rAoa. 


ΔῊ 38) 8 C.I.A, 11,8. 1206. 


— OEE 


£ The Argeus here mentioned was archon 97—96 8.0. 


THE CULTS OF OLBIA. 25 


Besides this 


τς inseription and the one at Olbia, there are only two others where this title 


Ἑὐπλοίας. 


of Aphrodite occurs. One,’ from Aegeae in Cilicia, Ist century B.c., is ἃ 
dedication to Aphrodite Εὔπλοια together with Poseidon ᾿Ασφάλειος. 
other is from Mylasa,® probably of later date ; it refers to ἱερεὺς ᾿Αφροδίτης 
Many cognate titles, however, are known from inscriptions, e.g. 
‘at Troezen an inscription 19 of the 3rd century B.ctspeaks of τᾶς ᾿Αφροδέτας 
τᾶς ἐμ βάσσαις, αὐτιὰ at Panticapaeum, in an inscription of the Roman period," 
we find Aphrodite Navapyis and Poseidon Ywaiveos-side by side.” 

The word ΕΥ̓ΠΛΟΙ is found on a gem which represents Eros riding on 


The 


a dolphin. Compare with this the inscription on a lamp shaped like a 
boat '* with the words, Εὔπλοια λαβέ με τὸν ᾿Ηλιοσέραπιν." Welcker 16 


quotes with approval Schneidewin’s emendation of Archilochus 17 


πολλὰ δ᾽ ἐὐπλοκάμου Ἑὐπλοίης ἁλὸς ἐν πελάγεσσιν 
θεσσάμενοι γλυκερὸν νόστον. 


A more detailed consideration of Aphrodite under this aspect would be 
out of place here: see Farnell, vol. 11, p. 636—7 ; 689 et seq. 


Aphrodite ’Amatoupos. 


As the inscription to Aphrodite Εὔπλοια is of late period, reference 
must be made to inscriptions from other places on the North Euxive which 


refer to the worship of Aphrodite. 


- The oldest inscription of Sarmatia,!® dating from the early part of the | 


5th century B.C., is a dedication to 


@E-:AMATOPO 


‘ie. Aphrodite ᾿Απάτουρος. 


B.c.,° contains the words 


This was found near the river Kuban. At 
Phanagoria a late inscription refers to Aphrodite ᾿Απατουριάς ; and there 
are two that refer to this cult at Panticapaeum ; 


one, perhaps Ist century 


7 Notice Farnell’s curious error (Greek Cults, 
ii. p. 733) in dating this inscription in the latter 
part of the fourth century B.c. 

-͵ 8 6.1.6. 4448. 
9, 9 Move. καὶ Βιβλιοθ. Σμύρνης, 1875, p. 50; 
! B.C.H. ν. 1880, 108 ; xii. 1888, 30. 
10 Collitz, Dial.-Inschr. 3364 b, 1. 14. 
_™ Latyschey, ii. 25. 

® For this connection with Poseidon compare 
Paus. vii. 24, 2, πρὸς θαλάσσης ᾿Αφροδίτης ἱερὸν 
ἐν. Αἰγίῳ καὶ per’ αὐτὸ Ποσειδῶνος, and also 
4 Bends 1881, 134-5; 1877, 246-εἰ seq. 

tlas, Plate v. No. 1, where Aphro- 
with a dolphin ona vase. C.1.G. 


Se ᾿ 
ΓΝ 


in ἃ chariot, ᾿Αφροδίτης. Ποσειδῶνος. Πυθοκλῆς 
καλός. 

1. 0. 1.ὕὔ΄. 7309, on which Boeckh comments, 
‘pertinuit ad navigationem in pelago amoris.’ 

164 6.1.6. 8514. 

15 Ts it worth while to note, in view of the 


* supposition that Posideos was a Rhodian, that 


the head of the sun appears on this lamp? ‘in 
extrema navicula caput radiatum Solis, quale 
esse solet in nummis Rhodiorum ’ (Boeckh). 

16 Gr. Gotterlehre, ii. p. 706. 

7 Zeitschr. f. ἃ. Alterth, 1845. S. 166. 

18 6.7.6. ii. 2133, Lat. ii. 469. 
19 Lat. ii. 352. 
30 Lat, ii. 19. 


26 G. M. HIRST 


ἀνέθηκ[αν τὴν στή]- 
λη[ν] ᾿Αφροδ[εἸέτῃ Οὐ[ρανέᾳ ᾿Απατού- 
[plou μεδεούσηι. 


This ᾿Απάτουρον is referred to by Strabo xi. 495, ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἐν τῇ 
Davayopia τῆς ᾿Αφροδίτης ἱερὸν ἐπίσημον τῆς ᾿Απατούρου. The other 
Panticapaeum inscription 2! is of the Roman period, and gives similar titles. 
One from Phanagoria * of the 4th century B.c. ought perhaps, to be quoted:— 


Δήμαρχος Σκύθεω 
ἀνέθηκεν ᾿Αφροδίτ[ηι]} 
Οὐρανίηι ᾿Απαωτούρο(υ) 
μεδεούσηι 

ἄρχοντος 

Λεύκωνος Βοσπόρ[ ο](υ) 
καὶ Θεοδοσίης. 


For this aspect of Aphrodite see Preller-Robert,” who say, apparently 
relying on this inscription, that at Phanagoria Aphrodite Apatouros does not 
seem to have differed from Aphrodite Urania, and remark on the prevalence 
of the worship of Aphrodite on the Black Sea, in her aspect as* goddess of 
the clan 4; in which connection it is worth noting that a great number of 
representations of Aphrodite, chiefly in terracotta, have been found in the 
Tauric Chersonese, one of which, at any rate, will have to be referred to 
later. Farnell” regards this refined cult of the goddess as the patroness 
of the married life of the clan asanative Greek development. May we press 
this as additional evidence of the purely Greek character of the colonies on 
the North Euxine? It may be noted that there was a month in the Ionic 
calendar called ’Azratoupedv.” 

As to the monumental evidence for this cult, Farnell seems right in 
saying (p. 705) that we have no sure monumental representation of Aphro- 
dite as the goddess of the clan, orthe civic community, unless we accept as 
genuine the relief upon which appears the inscription Θεὸ ᾿Απατουρο already 
quoted. This relief represents ‘Aphrodite with Eros and Ares; its style is 
quite out of keeping with the date of the inscription. ... The sculptor 
knew no other way of designating her as the clan-goddess, except by adding 
the figure of Ares for the idea of marriage and of Eros for the idea of love; 
and without the inscription, no one would recognize in her the goddess 
᾿Απατούρη. Stephani, on the other hand,” regards a relief in terracotta 
as a representation of Aphrodite ᾿Απάτουρος, but apparently this comes 
about because he considers ᾿Απάτουρος and Πάνδημος as interchangeable 


2 Lat, ii, 28. 2% Gi: Cults, ii, p. 656 et seq. 

22 Lat. ii. 349, C.7.G, 2120. Another, Lat. iv. 26 See references in Pauly-Wissowa, under 
419 (fourth century B.c.). Apaturion. I. p. 2680. One of the Olbian 

23 Gr. Myth, i. p. 378. months had this title, Lat. i. 28. 


24 The word ᾿Απάτουρος is of course derived 7 Compte Rendw, 1859, p. 126. Atlas, plate 
from the Ionic festival of the Apatouria. iv. No. 1, Farnell Gk, Cults, ii. p. 686, note. 


THE CULTS OF OLBIA. 27 


terms. He describes the relief as representing the goddess wrapped in a 
~ chiton, himation, and veil, seated on a goat, running rapidly to the right of 
the spectator. Two kids gambol below, indicating Aphrodite as the goddess 
of the generative power. That the goddess is Aphrodite is proved by the 
presence of Eros beliind her, and a dove flying in front. The goddess, he 
says, is represented in her character of Apatouros or Pandemos. Elsewhere 7 
he refers to a vase representing Aphrodite on a he-goat asa representation of 
Aphrodite ᾿Απάτουρος, and compares the well-known statue by Scopas; but 
as I should regard Apatouros and Pandemos as separate titles, consideration 
of these types of Aphrodite would here be out of place. 

It is perhaps worth noting that the name Apatourios occurs frequently 
as a proper name in inscriptions from the North Euxine district, among 
others in an Olbian one of the fifth century B.c., one of the only two known 
of so early a date.” 


Aphrodite Ovpavia. 


One other title of Aphrodite must be mentioned,—that of Οὐρανία, as 
it occurs in two inscriptions of Phanagoria * of the fourth century B.C. and two 
- later ones of Panticapaeum.*! It may be noted, however, that in all but one of 
these inscriptions (ii. 347) the title is jomed with that of ᾿Απάτουρος. Here 
Herodotus may be quoted, who says (iv. 59) that Aphrodite Οὐρανία was one 
of the special deities worshipped by the Scythians, and that they called her 
Artimpasa; though, if we-are right in believing that Olbia in its earlier 
period was little affected by Scythian customs, either in religion or anything 
else, the reference has little point here. Farnell*® says: ‘The clearest sign 
of the Eastern goddess in the Greek community is the title Οὐρανία, and 
notes that the worship of the goddess in this aspect is especially found in 
places which had conrection with Asia, instancing Panticapaeum as ἃ 
Milesian colony. It may be worth while here to remark that De Koehne * 
traces the origin of the cult of Helios at Olbia to its connection with 
Sinope; and the cult of Aphrodite Odpav/a may have been introduced in a 
similar way. 

In summing up the evidence for the cult of Aphrodite at Olbia, it must 
be admitted at once that we have no direct testimony except the one late 
inscription to Aphrodite Εὔπλοια. Still, it is reasonable to suppose that the 

cult was of some importance at Olbia, as we know that the worship of 
Aphrodite ᾿Απάτουρος was prevalent in the North Euxine district ; moreover, 
the number of representations of Aphrodite found there, especially in 
the Tauric Chersonese, helps to confirm this belief. 


38. Compte Rendu, 1871, plate v. No. a and 31 Lat. ii. 19, 28. 
p. 188, 184. 39. Gk, Cults, ii. p. 629. 
ς΄ -® Tat. iv. 28a. 33 Mus. du P. K. i. 59. 
νι ‘Tat. ii. 348, 847, iv. 419. ~ 
a -͵ 
Cm ἃ 


28 G. M. HIRST 


Artemis. 


The evidence for the cult of Artemis at Olbia is of an exactly opposite 
kind to that for Aphrodite; in the case of Artemis we have testimony from 
coins, but none from inscriptions. The type is not a very common one on 
Olbian coins. There is an example in the British Museum (No. 16) which 
has a head of Artemis on the obverse, and a quiver with strap on the 
reverse. This seems to be similar to the coin given by Pick. Three 
are given in the Berlin catalogue, Nos. 128-130, not unlike the above. 
De Koehne*® gives six, but four of these have been sometimes recog- 
nized as Demeter; the reverse is a dolphin or a sea-eagle, or both, and 
there seems to be no special reason for supposing that the head on the obverse 
is that of Artemis. 

Before considering at all the mass of literary material ΠΡ to the 
cult of Artemis on the North Euxine, the inscriptions referring to it had 
better be mentioned. There is one from Phanagoria of the fourth century 
B.C.*° which begins 

Ξενοκλείδης Πόσιος ἀνέθηκε τὸν ναὸν 
᾿Αρτέμιδι ᾿Αγροτέραι. 


With this may be compared the silver coin of Phanagoria, of the first century 
B.C., which has on the obverse a head of Artemis Agrotera.*’ At Pantica- 
paeum we find an inscription of the fourth century B.c. to Artemis ᾿Εἰφεσείη, 
which is interesting as again showing the connection of Panticapaeum 
with Asia,*®* and at Tanais there is one of Roman period, beginning θεᾷ 
᾿Αρτέμιδι wedeovon.*® 

More interesting, perhaps, are the two inscriptions from Chersonesus,* at 
which place, as we have already seen, Artemis held the position of city- 
goddess, and appears on the coins wearing the mural crown.*! The first 
inscription, which is of third “or second century B.c., is fragmentary, but 
contains the words τᾶς Παρθένου, and the second, which is a very long 
decree, has at 1. 24 the words ἃ διὰ παντὸς Χερσονασιτᾶν προστατοῦσα 
Παρθένος, which have already been quoted in comparison with the title 
Apollo IIpocrarns. Further down we have a reference to the Παρθενεῖα 
held in honour of Artemis, 1. 48: 


δεδόχθαι Tat βουλᾶι καὶ τῶι δάμωι στεφαν- 
fal , > , / 
ὥσαι Διόφαντον ᾿Ασκλαπιοδώρου χρυσέωι 
στεφάνωι Ἰ]αρθενείοις ἐν Tat πομπᾶι, 


34 Die Antiken Miinzen Nord-Griechenlands, πόλεις τε νομίζουσιν αἱ πᾶσαι καὶ ἄνδρας ἰδίᾳ θεῶν 


i. 1. Plate X. No. 6. μάλιστα ἄγουσιν ἐν τιμῇ. 
35 Joc. cit. pp. 62, 63. ᾿ 89 Lat. ii. 421. 
46 Lat. ii, 344. 40 Lat. i. 184, 185. 
37 Brit. Mus. Cat. Pontus, p. 3, Pl. I. 6. 4. See Berlin Catalogue under Chersonesus, 


38 Lat. ii. 11, Dittenberger, Syll,2 No. 326, and note especially Taf. i. 6. 
see also, Paus. 4. 31. 8. ᾿Ἐφεσίαν δὲ Αρτεμιν 


2 ῳ«-᾿ 


ὌντυΌυ--- 


i Mi 


THE CULTS OF OLBIA. 29 
and |. 51, 


σταθῆμεν δὲ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰκόνα χαλκέαν ἔν- 
οπλον ἐν τᾶι ἀκροπόλει παρὰ τὸν τᾶς Παρθέν- 
ov βωμὸν καὶ τὸν τᾶς Χερσονάσου. 


An inscription from the Tauric Chersonese 42 dated probably about 150 
B.C, contains the formula of the oath taken by magistrates : 


ὀμνύω Δία Τἂν Αλιον Παρθένον — Ὀλ- 
υμπίους καὶ ᾿Ολυμπίας. 


So we have abundant evidence, even Νἰ ον the literature, for the para- 
mount importance of the cult of Artemis at Chersonesus. 

The story of the legendary connection of Artemis with the Tauric 
Chersonese presents many difficulties. To quote Herodotus first: he says “Ὁ 
that the Tauri sacrifice shipwrecked persons to the Virgin, τὴν δὲ δαίμονα 
ταύτην τῇ θύουσι λέγουσι αὐτοὶ Ταῦροι ᾿Ιφιγένειαν τὴν ᾿Αγαμέμνονος εἶναι, 
on which Stein’s comment is " αὐτοὶ Ταῦροι, nicht die Hellenen.’ 

Farnell “ thinks that the worship of the Tauric Artemis was aboriginal 
in Attica, and that in any case it cannot have come from the Black Sea 
originally, as the cult of Brauron points to a very early period, and the Crimea 
was opened to Greek civilization at a comparatively late time. The worship 
of Artemis under this aspect seems to have been connected with a very 
primitive type of idol, and with a vague legend of bloodshed, so he thinks 
that when the early settlers of the Crimea spread the story of the cruel rites 
of the native goddess, the similarity of sound in the name of the peninsula 
and the cult-name at Brauron (probably Ταυροπόλος) caused the identifica- 
tion. Iphigeneia, he thinks, was a local cult-name of Artemis, and he quotes 
Pausanias,® ᾿Αρτέμιδος ἐπίκλησιν ᾿Ιφυιγενείας ἐστὶν ἱερόν ; also Hesychius, s.v. 
᾿Ιφιγένεια" ἡ "Άρτεμις. 

However, there is some slight verbal inconsistency, at all events, between 
this view and that put forward by Farnell himself on the first and second 
pages of vol. ii—that the cult of Artemis can be traced back to a prehistoric 
period, and is found in all the chief places of prehistoric Greek settlement ; 
from which, and from certain most primitive features of the cult, he infers 
that it was ‘an aboriginal inheritance of the Greek nation.’ Then he speaks 
of its diffusion through the various streams of Greek colonization—‘it was 
implanted at an early time. . .in the Tauric Chersonese.’ According to 
Professor Ridgeway * traces of Mycenaean culture have been found along the 
shore of South Russia. Would it not then be an admissible conjecture that 
the barbarous goddess of the Crimea was the lineal descendant of the Artemis 
worshipped by the inhabitants of the same district in the Mycenaean Age, 
and that the Brauronian Artemis was the descendant of the same divinity in 
Greece proper? Thus we could account for the resemblances between the 


45 Quoted by Farnell, Gk. Culis, ii. 567 from 4 Greek Cults, ii. 452, 3. 
Revue des Etudes Grecques, 1891, p. 338. 45 1,86,.2: 
43 iv. 103. % Karly Aye of Greece, vol. i. p. 182. 


fh 


80 G. Μ. HIRST 


two cults. The influence of the literature that sprang up around the story 
of Iphigeneia would have its effect, as time went on, and the worship became 
less primitive, in confirming the position of Artemis as chief goddess of the 
Chersonese, as we have suggested already in the case of Apollo at Olbia, and 
his mythical connection with the North. The cult of Heracles at Olbia was 
no doubt affected in the same way by the literature. 

We may judge, then, that the cult of Artemis was of some importance 
at Olbia, even though we have no direct evidence except the few coins 
quoted. Perhaps, too, we should be justified in thinking that Artemis must 
have had some share of special honour in a city of which Apollo was the 
tutelary deity. 


Athene. 


Athene may be taken next, as the only other female deity for whose 
worship at Olbia we have any evidence ; though her cult has no connection 
with that of the four preceding goddesses, who are all, under some of their 
various aspects, more or less linked. There are no inscriptions from Olbia 
that mention the name of Athene, and only two from the North Euxine district 
—a dedication to Athene Σώτειρα at Chersonesus * of the fourth century B.C., 
and the dedication to Athene Lindia from Neapolis.“ However, this has a 
certain connection with Olbia, as the dedicator is Posideos the son of 
Posideos, whom we may conclude to be the same as the man who made the 
dedication to Aphrodite Εὔπλοια at Olbia. 

But Athene and the Gorgon are frequent types ou the Olbian coins. It is 
quite likely that the type of Athene had a commercial rather than a religious 
origin, since Olbia traded especially with Athens, and the Athenian coins 
would be familiar at Olbia, as through so large a part of the Greek world. 
Indeed, it is not improbable that the absence of very early coins of Olbia is 
due to the use of Athenian money, and (perhaps a little later) of the Cyzicene 
staters, as the regular circulating medium of Olbia, and that the large cast 
bronze pieces, to which we shall soon refer, were intended to supply small 
change for home use.” We have some interesting evidence of the money in 
use at Olbia from an inscription given by Latyschev.*° The inscription, which 
dates from the beginning of the fourth century B.c., is a decree of the people 
of Olbia for regulating the sale of gold and silver. After decreeing that 
there shall be free importation and exportation of χρυσίον ἐπίσημον ἢ 
ἀργύριον ἐπίσημον, the inscription proceeds : 


ν \ \ ? - , \ Ν ’ 
πωλεῖν δὲ καὶ ὠνεῖσθαι πάντα πρὸς TO νόμισμα 
. τὸ τῆς πόλεως, πρὸς τὸν χαλκὸν καὶ τὸ ἀρ- 
γύριοι τὸ ᾿Ολβιοπολιτικόν. 


47 Lat. iv. 82. quité, vol. i. p. 157. 
48 Lat. i, 348: 50 Lat. i. 11. 
49 Cp. Lenormant, La Monnaie dans l Anti- 


THE CULTS OF OLBIA. 31 


From this it is clear that there was no gold money of Olbia at this date 
(though gold coins must have come into use soon afterwards, apparently, as 
another inscription δ᾽ speaks of 1000 gold pieces); and it might perhaps be 
conjectured that the copper money was more abundant than the silver, as it 
is mentioned first, and not in order of value, as in the case of the gold and 
silver at the beginning. A little further down in the same (i. 11) inscription 
we have :— 

τὸ δὲ χρυσίον πωλεῖν καὶ ὠνεῖσθαι τὸν μὲν 

στατῆρα τὸν Κυζικηνὸν ἕνδεκα τοῦ ἡμιστα- 

τήρου καὶ μήτε ἀξιώτερον μήτε τιμιώτερ- 

ον, τὸ δ᾽ ἄλλο χρυσίον τὸ ἐπίσημον 

ἅπαν καὶ ἀργύριον τὸ ἐπίσημον πωλεῖν καὶ 

ὠνεῖσθαι ὡς ἂν ἀλλήλους πείθωσι. 


From the special mention of the Cyzicene staters, we should infer that 
they were the coins in commonest use at Olbia at this period. But the 
period of the most active intercourse between Olbia and Athens was the 
earlier one, before the Peloponnesian War—the trade was probably at its 
height in the time of Herodotus—and it may well have been that the staple 
medium of exchange at Olbia in the earlier days was the Athenian coinage. 
A head of Athene is one of the commonest of the counter-marks on Olbian 
coins; upon which Prof. Percy Gardner has made (privately) the following 
interesting comment :—‘ A counter-mark is often put on a coin to show that 
it is current at some place where it was not struck. Can this mean that the 
coin passed at some Athenian factory?’ We long here for some of the 
knowledge of the commercial history of the North Euxine that Herodotus 
would have been so competent to give us. He has told us so much of ancient 
trade, but so little about Olbia and the Greek colonies of this district, there 
is hardly a trade-reference bearing upon the North Euxine except that to the 
Scythians © of οὐκ ἐπὶ σιτήσι σπείρουσι τὸν σῖτον ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ πρήσει. 

At all events most numismatists agree that the large cast bronze pieces 
are among the earliest of Olbian coins,** and one of the smaller of these 
pieces * has a very archaic head of Athene on the obverse. Of the Gorgon- 
head that appears on several of the other coins of this class we will speak 
later. 

The British Museum catalogue does not describe any coin bearing a 
head of Athene, and the Berlin collection has only one (No. 133), apparently 
of late period, though from the very sparing use of dates in that otherwise 
admirable catalogue, it is frequently difficult to decide the exact period to 
which the editor would assign any given coin. De Koehne (p. 35) gives four 
of the cast pieces, similar to that quoted above from Pick, and four bronze 
struck coins (p. 61). Of these, No. 101 appears to be similar to that given 


δ Lat. i. 12, These need not necessarily 53 De Koehne assigns them to the beginning 


have been coins of Olbia, but may have been οἵ the fifth century or even earlier. 


from Panticapaeum or Cyzicus. δὲ Pick, Pl. viii. 1. 
52 Herod. iv. 17. 


32 α. M. HIRST 


by Pick.°> It has a head of Pallas on the obverse and an owl on the reverse. 
The two coins immediately above this in Pick’s plate (Nos. 15 and 16) seem 
also to have heads of Athene; the reverse type on both appears to be an owl. 
No. 36 in Pick seems to be similar to No. 100 in De Koehne, and to No, 133 
in the Berlin collection. ‘The obverse of the Berlin coin shows a head 
of Pallas, with a branch as counter-mark ; on the reverse is a shield and lance. 
No. 37 in Pick probably represents Athene also; the reverse type is a 
shield. : 

This is the principal numismatic evidence for the cult of Athene at 
Olbia; but the famous medallion found in the North Euxine district,®® now 
in the Hermitage, and representing Athene Parthenos may be also mentioned, 
It probably came straight from Athens. 

No place in the North Euxine district occurs in the register of Athene- 
cults given by Farnell, but he says *’—‘ As in the earliest times we find the 
worship of Athena in very various parts of the Greek world, we can con- 
clude that she was a primitive Hellenic divinity of the “ Achaean ” period, and 
originally worshipped also by the Dorian and Ionic tribes, or adopted by 
them in their new settlements.’ And we know that Athene was worshipped 
at Miletus, the mother-city of Olbia.°* We should of course expect to find 
Athene held in honour at Miletus, which prided itself on being a colony of 
Athens, and Miletus in turn would be very likely to transmit the cult to its 
own colony Olbia, where it would receive a stimulus, if any were needed 
from the commercial relations between Olbia and Athens. 

The Gorgoneion which appears on Olbian coins raises questions or 
considerable difficulty, both in regard to the type and the deity with which 
it is connected. The story that Athene herself slew the Medusa is not very 
early in date; Hesiod does not mention it, and Euripides appears to be the 
first literary authority for 10. Farnell traces the origin of the story to 
Athene’s interest in Perseus. Furtwingler (in Roscher’s Lexicon) states 
that Athene does not appear ou the monuments wearing the Gorgoneion 
earlier than the seventh century, and thinks there is no earlier literary 
evidence than this that Athene wore it as a badge, or of its use as an 
element of terror. Of course the date for the proved association of Athene 
with the Gorgon is early enough to allow us to regard the Gorgoneion on 
Olbian coins as an emblem of Athene; but another view would associate it 
with Apollo. M. Homolle,® in an article on a Gorgon found on the base of a 
statue at Delos, which he explains as a simple ἀποτρόπαιον, thinks that a 
close relation existed between Apollo and the Gorgon, and quotes Homer 
Iliad xv. 229, 308, (referring to Apollo’s use of the aegis), and Macrobius, 
i. 17. 67. The latter author, in describing a statue of Apollo at Hierapolis 


SPL, Avs . © He regards the two references to the Gor- 


56 Myth. and Monum. of Ancient Athens, goneion in the Iliad. (xi. 35-6, v. 741) as in- 
Harrison and Verrall, p. 454. terpolations. 

57 Gk. Cults, i. p. 259. : 61. Bull. Corr. Hell. xii. (1888),. p. 471. 

$8 Herod. i..19. .,’ Pl. xii: 


ὅν Jon, 987 et seq. 


i 2 ate “4. 


THE CULTS OF OLBTA. 33 


says ‘Summisque ab humeris gorgoneum velamentum redimitum anguibus 
tegit scapulas. M. Homolle remarks that the Gorgon appears on coins with 
emblems of Apollo, and cites as example the dolphin on Olbian coins. But 
this seems hardly conclusive, as it has been already seen that the dolphin (or 
fish-type) occurs on coins of Olbia with deities other than Apollo, ¢.g., those 
whose obverse type is a head of Demeter. The question can probably not be 
decided, but the fact that on the large bronze coins of Olbia the only types 
are Athene and the Gorgon (including for the moment the beautiful head 
that appears on the latest of these coins) would seem to be of some weight 
in guiding us to associate the Gorgoneion on these coins with Athene rather 
than with Apollo. If we have been right in laying stress on Athenian 


Fic. 7.—Bronze CoIn or OLBIA IN THE British Museum. 


influence in the adoption of Athene as a coin-type at Olbia, this would e 
another indication in the same direction. 

The consideration of the type of the Gorgoneion presents equal difficulties. 
Tt seems to have been borrowed from the East about the end of the eighth 
or beginning of the seventh century B.c.; the earliest example known is a 
plaque from Cameiros of the seventh century.” The early Gorgons were 
all of the hideous type, which passed through a period of transition before a 
beautiful type was elaborated. A series of bronzes discovered on the 
Acropolis at Athens illustrates these changes; the middle type began at 
Athens before 480 3.c. It is found on the Euxine before 450 B.c. in the 
valley of the Kuban.“ This type grew common in the second half of the 


® Daremberg-Saglio, Fig. 3633. 54 Compte Rendu, 1877, Pl. ii. 1, and p. 7. 
5} Daremb.-Sagl., Fig. 3639. 
H.S.— VOL, XXIII, | D 


34 Ο. Μ. HIRST 


fifth century.” It should be noted that a type οἵ Gorgoneion like that 
from the Kuban is found in the Crimea down to the fourth century.®® Gold 
Gorgons were found at Kertsch in graves of the fifth century. The beautiful 
type of Gorgon’s head appears in the fifth century, and becomes common 
in the fourth; the calm style first, and later the pathetic.” 
Notwithstanding, however, the undoubted evolution of a more attractive 
type of Gorgon, I have never been able to feel that the beautiful head on the 
coin given by Pick® can be a Gorgon. I was glad to find that I had 
the support of Professor Percy Gardner in this view. He points out (in 
a private letter) that the wing is wanting. But he has no identification 
for the type, though he suggests very tentatively a nymph (7). This suggestion 
seems well worth consideration; anyone who looks at the various full-faced 


Fie. 8.—Bronzk Coin oF OLBIA IN THE BRITISH MusEUM, 


heads of nymphs given in Professor Gardner’s ‘Types of Greek Coins’ 
cannot fail to be struck by the resemblance they bear to the head on this 
large coin of Olbia. Examine first the head of Arethusa, by the artist Cimon, 
on a coin of Syracuse, then the nymph on a coin of Larissa,” and 
another on a coin of Cyzicus."! Certainly the resemblance between these 


6 See J.H.S. xiii. 1892, p. 236, Fig. 4; p. Berlin Catalogue, p. 19. A specimen has been 
238, Fig. 10. (note that here Fig. 4 is assigned added to the British Museum collection since 


to the sixth century). the publication of the catalogue of Olbian coins, 
66 πη. du Bosp. Cimm. Pl. xxi. 12, ete. and is given in the accompanying Fig. 7. 
67 An example of the beautiful head, without 69 Types of Greek Coins, Pl. vi. 22. [ 
wings, is given in Compte Rendu, 1876, PI. iii. τὸ ibid, Pl. vii. 35. 
28, p. 147. τι ibid. Pl. x. 46, 


68 Joc, cit. Pl. viii, 4. It is given in the 


THE CULTS OF OLBIA. 35 


heads and that on the Olbian coin is close enough to justify a tentative 
identification of the latter as a nymph,” thus avoiding the (to my mind) 
impossible assignation of the type to the Gorgon. I may quote the descrip- 
tion of the similar example in the Berlin catalogue No, 2 :— 


Obverse. Reverse. 
Female head facing, with flying hair | OABIH,”* Eagle on Dolphin, |. head 
and bead necklace, of good style. turned to r. with outspread wings. 
Δ 117} | Below Γ or similar letter.” 


It willat once be noted that von Sallet in the Berlin catalogue (published 
1888) only describes this type as a female head ; though the year before in 
describing this coin” he calls it ‘a good specimen of the very rare large cast 
coins or tokens of Olbia with the female head (Gorgo?) and eagle, of fine style.’ 
It seems fair to conclude from this that in the catalogue von Sallet gives up his 
doubtful attribution of the previous year. It is also worth noting that he 
puts this coin between No. 1, described as follows (No. 3 in Pick) :— 


Obver'se. Reverse. 
Gorgoneion facing, of archaic style, APIX with eagle r. which with out- 
with tongue protruded,”® stretched wings stands on dolphin. 
| Δ 17}. 
and No, 3 (No. 2 in Pick):— 
᾿ Obverse. Reverse. 
Gorgoneion facing, of arehaic style, | APIX in the open spaces of a wheel 


with tongue protruded. | with four spokes. 


(Nos. 4-12 are smaller coins, with more or less similar types.) 

If this arrangement is to be regarded as chronological (an uncertain 
point, from the scarcity of dates in the catalogue, already alluded to), then 
surely the attribution of the type to the Gorgon becomes impossible, or at 
least improbable. It is unlikely that two heads of such wholly different 
types could be in circulation at the same moment in the same city, and 
be recognized as representing the same object. It should be noted that 
the Berlin catalogue describes a coin which does not appear in Pick’s 
illustrations (No. 13) :— 


_ Obverse. Reverse. 


Gorgoneion, tongue not protruded, of | OA.! Eagle with raised wings on 
old style. _ dolphin, |. # 11. 


No. 14 is similar. 


72 On the coins bearing full-face heads of coin as ‘Téte de Méduse, d'un style plus 
Nymphs, the representatives of a very large moderne etavec une belle expression.’ 


class, see Gardner, Joc. cit. p. 154. so 7% Zeitschr. f. Num. xiv. 1887, p. 5. 
73 Note the occurrence of the town-name in 76 Cp. similar coin (not the same) in accom- 
_ this form. panying Fig. 8. 


τε De Koehne(p. 35, No. 6) describes a similar 
: Ρ 32 


30 G. Μ. HIRST 


All the above-mentioned coins are large bronze cast pieces. One other 
coin, a silver one of rather later period, is thus deseribed in the Berlin cata- 
logue, No. 36 :— 


Obverse. | Reverse. 
Gorgon’s head facing, apparently OABIO over a dolphin, 1. Below 
without protruded tongue.’ KPI MR 2: 


Note also that De Koehne’® assigns this coin to the beginning of the: 


third century (which is not very different from the date one would conjecture 
from its position in the Berlin catalogue). Does not this add to the difficulty 
of regarding the beautiful head on the bronze coin, which is almost certainly 
of earlier date, as a Gorgon ? 


Zeus. 


The consideration of the cult of Zeus at Olbia must not be deferred 
longer. At Olbia it seems essential to take Apollo first, and Demeter has 
a claim to the second position, and then it is most convenient to treat of the 
other female deities in close connection ; so that this seems the place where 
Zeus may properly be considered. Farnell“? may be referred to for some 
general remarks as to the absence from the monuments of Zeus of distinctive 
cult-attributes, for his cult was Hellenic pre-eminently, and not local. So 
we do not expect to have at Olbia titles of such special interest in the case of 
Zeus as in that of some other gods, though there is at any rate one striking 
exception in the case of Zeus "᾿Ὄλβιος. 

The first Olbian inscription which bears the name of Zeus is Lat. i. 12, a 
decree granting 1000 gold pieces and a statue to Kallinikos the son of 
Euxenos (dated by Latyschev in the fourth century B.c.) which ends: ὁ δῆμος 
Aut Σωτῆρι. The name of Zeus Σωτήρ also occurs in two other inscriptions 
of Olbia, but one 8° is of the second century after Christ, and the other * is 
a mere fragment. 

Lat. i. 91 is a dedication to Zeus Σωτήρ by a private individual of 


εὐχαριστήριον ὑπὲρ εἰρήνης καὶ σωτηρίας 
τῆς πόλεως. - 


With this may be compared an inscription from Chersonesus * (second 
century after Christ) where some one whose name is lost 


TO τεῖχος ὠικοδόμησεν ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων 
Διὶ Σωτῆρι ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τῆς πόλεως 


εὐσταθείας. 
77 Is this the same coin as Pick’s example, Lat. i. 91. 
Pl. x. 10? 81 Lat. i. 92. 
78 Given by De Koehne, Joc. cit. p 42 No. 3. 82 Lat. i. 202. 


79 Gk, Cults, i. p. 121, 61. 


oe 


THE CULTS OF OLBIA. 37 


x τς There is one from Panticapaeum δ᾽ where the name of Zeus Σωτήρ is 
ποὺς joined with Ἥρα Σώτειρα ;* it is of the imperial period, and the dedication 
is made . 

- ὑπὲρ βασιλέως Τειράνου νείκης.δ5 


There is a fragmentary inscription of the third century B.c. to Zeus 
z "EXevB€pios, a well-known cult-title of Zeus, though not occurring else- 
where in the North Euxine district. 
The name of Zeus Βασελεύς occurs in an πονῶν: given by Latyschev 5ἴ 
and assigned by him to the third century B.C. : 


[ὁ δῆμος] Εὐρησίβιον Δημητρίου Διὶ Βασιλεῖ 
[ἀρετῆς] ἕνεκεν καὶ εὐνοίας τῆς εἰς αὑτόν." 


A tower is dedicated to Zeus Πολεώρχης in an inscription given by 
Latyschev,® assigned by him to the second century after Christ. Farnell ” 
says ‘(?) third century B.c.’ without explaining his reason for the date. 
This is the only instance he gives of this title, but the cognate one of Zeus 
ἸΠολιεύς occurs in many places, notably at Athens. The cult expressed the 
union of the State. 

Perhaps, however, the most interesting title of Zeus for the present 
enquiry is that of λβιος, which occurs in an inscription given by Latyschev * 
and assigned by him to the reign of Septimius Severus, 193-211 a.p. It is 
a decree in honour of Kallisthenes, 


ἱερεὺς δὲ γενόμενος τοῦ προεστῶτος τῆς 
πόλεως ἡμῶν θεοῦ Διὸς Ολβώου. Ξ 


This title receives rather curious treatment from Farnell. He says” 

‘Not only was Zeus the guardian of kingship, but also the protector of the 

family property, and worshipped as Zeus Κτήσιος.... This worship was 

especially Attic; we find the similar cults of Zeus Πλούσιος in Sparta 

- (Paus. iii. 19. 7) and Zeus "OAvo0s in Cilicia.” For this latter he quotes an 
4 inscription, civca 200 B.c., given by Canon Hicks :—” 


Ati Ὀλβίῳ ἱερεὺς Τεῦκρος Tapxvapios. 


: But this is apparently explained by Canon Hicks himself as referring to 
the priest-kings of Olba, and rather as a local than descriptive epithet. The 


xs 


—* Lat. if. 9. . Aeds, see Pauly-Wissowa, Real.-Encycl. iii. 
__ ™ Cp. the dedication to Athene Xérepa αὐ }. 82, and especially Mr, Greenwell’s article, 
ΕΞ 9. ο us, fourth century n.c., Lat, iv. 82. JUS. vol. ii, p. 78. 
ce abe "Ὁ Note that Farnell does not quote_any of 89. Lat. i, 101. 
the abov μιϑυρεήνθρον. ἴα his geographical = ™ Gk. Cults, i. p. 101. 
regi nm rai κῃ νά cy τὶν Lat. i. 21. 

ἦν μα! en ἫΣ % Gk, Cults, i, p. ὕῦ. 


eee ont 38. JH.S. 1891, p. 226. 
‘ ref seen wat fous βασι Bs ‘ 


Bx e 
= J 


- = 


38 G. M. HTRST 


only other reference given by Farnell (he does not mention this inscription 
from Olbia at all) is C./.G. 2017, a decree from the Thracian Chersonese :-— 


Κάλλιστος ὑπὲρ Tov ὑιοῦ ᾿Αλεξάνδρου Διὶ 
ὀλβίέῳ εὐχαριστήριον. 


on which Boeckh’s comment is “Ζεὺς ὄλβιος non notus.’ In this last- 
mentioned inscription it would seem natural to consider ὄλβιος as a de- 
scriptive epithet, and justifiable to compare it with κτήσιος ; but surely at- 
both Olbia and Olba it must be primarily a local- epithet, with no doubt a 
play upon the meaning of the word. Preller-Robert ®* say, in commenting 
on Lat. 1. 24, “Ζεὺς "Ολβιος seems to be the city god of Olbia.” This 
again can hardly be correct in the ordinary meaning of the term; we have 
seen that Apollo was the regular civic deity of Olbia; it would seem to be 
more exact to say: ᾿Ολβιος, a name under which Zeus was worshipped at 
Olbia.” ' 

The above titles of Zeus are all that occur in Olbian inscriptions, but 
one from Neapolis °* may also be quoted :— 


Διὶ ᾿Αταβυρίωι Ἰ]οσίδεος ἸΤοσιδέου χαριστήριον. 


This Posideos is no doubt the same man who made the dedication to 
Aphrodite Εὔπλοια at Olbia. Atabyron was a mountain in Rhodes ἐξ οὗ ὁ 
Ζεὺς ᾿Αταβύριος (Steph. Byz.). Athene was worshipped with Zeus Atabyrios 
at Agrigentum.” Preller-Robert * quote Pindar, Οἱ. vii. 87 :— 


Zed πάτερ νώτοισιν ᾿Αταβυρίου μεδέων. 


The coins of Olbia which have Zeus as type are neither very numerous 
nor very interesting. The first given by Pickis Plate xi. No. 3, apparently 
the same coin as No. [25 in the Berlin catalogue. On the obverse is a 
laureate head of Zeus; on the reverse is a sceptre ending like a spear below, 
above, in a lily (or lotus ?). 

This reverse type is rather curiously described by De Koehne® as 
‘Fléche, la pointe en bas,’ but the object certainly does not much resemble 
an arrow in Pick’s plate. De Koehne also says that the coin probably 
represents Zeus Soter, but gives no reason for the identification. Nos. 126, 
127, in the Berlin catalogue are similar; it is to be assumed from their 
arrangement both here and in Pick that they are of somewhat late date. 
The next coin given by Pick ! has a very fine head of Zeus as the obverse 
type, and on the reverse an eagle with outspread wings, both apparently in 


% (Gr, Myth.) 1°. 867. Olbios date probably at the end of the first 
% See Brit. Mus. Cat. of Coins, Lycaonia, century B.c, and the beginning of the next. 
Ῥ. ἵν]. note, ‘“OAios, a well-known epithet of % Lat. i, 242. ᾿ 
Zeus, would mean (1) the god of prosperity, (2) "7 Welcker, Gr. G, ii. 282, Polyb. xi. 27. 
the god of Olba,’ [or in this case of Olbia]. 98. Gr, Myth. i. 136. 
‘The abstract idea of prosperity is represented 6ῸῈ * loc. cit. p. 59. 
by the concrete god’ Zeus Olbios.’ The coins nates es αν 
of Olba with throne and thunderbolt of Zeus 


Ὄν i υ να 


THE CULTS OF OLBIA. 39 


rather high relief. Coin No, 5 is similar to (though not the same as) No. 


63 in the Berlin Catalogue, which only differs from Pick’s coin in having a 


caduceus as counter-mark on the cheek of Zeus, whose head is the obverse 
type. The reverse type is an eagle. Coin No, 6 shows the caduceus in front 
of the head of Zeus. Several Imperial coins representing Zeus seated are 
described by De Koehne, but only one ™! appears in Pick’s plates. On the 
obverse is a seated figure holding a sceptre, on the reverse a standing figure 
of Fortune, with a horn of plenty and a rudder. Perhaps the sceptre causes 
De Koehne to identify the type as Zeus: it is described as Apollo in the 
Berlin catalogue (No. 134).105 | 


Hermes. 


Hermes may be considered next, as he appears both in inscriptions and 
on coins of Olbia. Hermes and Apollo were often worshipped side by side, 
as a brother-pair—Apollo as mouthpiece and prophet of Zeus, Hermes as 
his outstretched right hand; and so the two stood together in.streets and 
before doors—Apollo as ’Ayuteds, Hermes as ’Evodcos.!°* So we should expect 
to find some testimony to the cult of Hermes at Olbia, where Apollo held 
such a high position. He was the god of trade, markets, and commerce, 
both by land and sea; therefore a statue of Hermes ’Ayopaios (whom we shall 
find mentioned in two Olbian inscriptions) stood in the market-place of every 
important town. 

The earliest inscription found at Olbia referring to Hermes is of the 
third century B.c.,! and begins: 


[Nexodpo]uos Διονυσίου [γυμνασ)ιαρχήσας 
[τὸν vilov (7) Διονύσιον ᾿Ἐξρμ[ῆι] καὶ ἩΗρακλεῖ. 


This would appear to be a dedication to Hermes in his character of dywvcos.!" 

Hermes Agoraios was the god to whom the aediles (ἀγορανόμοι) of 
Olbia made offerings. Two of these dedicatory inscriptions have come down 
to us. It is worth while to quote Latyschev’s description of the carving 
above the first of these inscriptions: ‘Super titulo Fortunae rota incisa est, 
infra manu admodum rudi Mercurii protome, dextra marsupium tenentis, 
sinistra caduceum, utrimque foliola e quibus id, quod ad dextram spectanti 
est, caput humanum in medio incisum habet. The end of the inscription 
may be quoted—after the names of the ἀγορανόμοι :— 


“Ἑρμῇ ᾿Αγοραίωι ἀνέθηκαν Νείκην apyvpéav 
ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως εὐσταθίας καὶ τῆς 
ἑαυτῶν ὑγείας. 


101 De Koehne, loc. cit. p. 88. . 14 Preller-Robert, Gr. Mfyth, ὃς. 885, 
1. ῬΙ, xi. 22: - 105 Lat. iv. 459. 
8 If the attribution to Zeus is accepted, 6 For references to other places wliere 


might it be considered as a representation of Hermes and Heracles appear together, see 


-Zeus”OdABws, in consideration of the reverse Preller-Robert, i. p, 415, n. 4. 


typet . 107 Lat, i, 75. 76. 


, 
ἸΣ, 


40, 6. Μ. HIRST 


The second inscription only differs in the names of the archon and ὠγορα- 
νόμοι. Both are of quite late period. 

Two coins representing Hermes are given by Pick ; 105 there are none in 
the Berlin collection. Both of Pick’s coins have a head of Hermes wearing 
a petasos as obverse type, but the heads are quite different. No, 32 is very 
badly struck ; if the coin were divided into four quarters, the head would fill 
little more than the lower quarter at the left; the petasos is much flatter, 
and more distinct than in No. 33. No. 33 has also a branch as counter- 
mark behind the head. Both these coins have a winged caduceus as reverse 
type. 

There is another coin which may be referred to here, that of the Scythian 
king Inismeus, given by Pick,!* with a turreted female head (Tyche of 
Olbia) as reverse type. It is described by De Koehne 1 as having a 
bearded head of Hermes on the obverse, but the type has none of the 
charactermtics of Hermes, and it is more likely to be a portrait of the 
king Inismeus. De Koehne assigns this coin to the period of the recon- 
struction of Olbia, 7 ¢., between 60 B.c. and 193 A.D. 


Poseidon. 


Strictly speaking, Poseidon can hardly claim to be considered as having 
a cult at Olbia at all, as no inscriptions bear his name, and it is doubtful 
whether he is represented on the coins. However, there is an interesting 
inscription from Panticé 11 in which II λέ 7 akes ¢ 
inscription from Panticapaeum, in which ἸΤανταλέων ναύαρχος makes a 
dedication 
Ποσιδῶνι Ywoue|@|e καὶ ᾿Αφροδίτηι Ναυαρχίδι, 


on which Latyschev's comment is,—‘ Dei et deae epitheta, quae in titulo 
leguntur, primum hic videntur innotuisse.’ This connection of Poseidon with 
Aphrodite has already been referred to under Aphrodite Εὔπλοια. 

De Koehne 1” gives two coins which he considers represent Poseidon. 
The first (No. 43) he describes as follows :— 


Obverse. Reverse. 
Téte de Poseidon. Hache, Goryte, Carquois. 


He admits, however, that the head might be identified as Zeus. But surely 
the presence of the battle-axe and bow in case on the reverse makes its 
identification as the Borysthenes more likely." 

The other coin quoted by De Koehne (No. 44) appears to be that given 
by Pick (Pl. ix. 24). It is thus described by De Koehne :— 


8 ῬΊ, x, 32. 33. Seealso De Koehne, loc, cit. 111 Lat, ii, 25, 
i. p. 66. U2 106. eit. p. 44. 45, ν᾿ 
“9 Ὁ, αὶ. 9.2 ͵ 13 This is apparently the coin given oe Pick, 


10 Joc, cit. i. 71. Pl, ix. 82, 


THE CULTS OF OLBIA. 41 


ΤΙ Obverse. Reverse. 
 Téte de Poseidon, ἃ gauche. OABI- Dauphin, ἃ gauche, en bas, 


. o. 


If it were not for the dolphin on the reverse, this head might easily be 

taken for the river-god, (and indeed this attribution is suggested in the 

_ Berlin catalogue, No. 66) as the forehead, where the horns would come, is 

indistinct. But as the series of Borysthenes coins has a battle-axe and bow 

in case as reverse type, it seems possible to assign this head to Poseidon. . 

His cult would be likely to be of some importance as Olbia, both because it 

was a maritime town, and because in Ionia the worship of Poseidon held a 
ἐν chief place.'!4 


Pak 4 


° Dionysus. 


There is no doubt about the right of Dionysus to a place among the 
cult-deities of Olbia, as we have Herodotus’! authority for the fact of the 
celebration of his mysteries there, for through this came about the death of 
the Scythian king Scyles. 

Also there is an inscription referring to the Dionysia at Olbia, the decree 
in honour of Kallinikos 115 already referred to, which concludes :-— 


τὸν δὲ στέφανον ἀναγορευθῆναι 
τοῖς Διονυσίοις ἐν τῶι θεάτρωι. 


This decree is assigned by Latyschev to the fourth century Bc. The name 
of Dionysus also occurs in two Panticapaeum inscriptions.’ The latter is 
especially interesting ; it cousists of the words, 


Διονύσω[ε} 
᾿Α]ρεέωι. 


This title of Dionysus was only known before from an Orphic hymn (30 4); 
Latyschev dates the inscription, (which was found in aaa in the fourth 
century B.C, 

It is perhaps surprising that Dionysus does not appear on Olbian coins ; 
but on the vase-paintings found in this region Dionysus and Ariadne and 
=) _kindred subjects are of frequent occurrence.!'* 


— oe = ..... ...΄ὦ΄ὦὃἃἝὯἽἕἽἪἝἽἝ.ς. -.-- 0 06;.. 


4 Among other references may be given colonists seem to have carried the worship of 
‘Herod. i, 148, Paus. vii. 24. 5, (Frazer's note), the Phrygian Bacchus (Sabazius) to Olbia. 
μι." ἃ, Arch. Tust, 10, (1885), p 82, Bull. Hence Olbia itself was called Σαβία or Zavia, 
Hell. 13. (1889), p. 279. = (Peripl. P. Eux, p.151)’—surely a most imp1ob- 
ἦν Ποιὰ. ἰν, 78, 79.—an important passage able derivation. 
any wal a etee it does the re high 116 Lat, i, 12. 

lizatic ἃς 5 Oe, 
7 ‘04 1 on the Scythian 
loc.) ΝΣ hd aaa 


17 Lat. ii. 18, iv. 199. 


49 G. Μ. HTRST 


Aves. 


The claim of Ares to a place in this discussion is doubtful. We have 
the well-known passage of Herodotus, already referred to,—the temple of 
brushwood and the worship of the ancient sword. But in the first place it 
is by no means certain that this was a worship of Ares at all; it sounds much 


more like a savage sword-worship ; and in the second, even if it were proved: 


that Ares was a special object of cult among the -Scythians, it would still 
not follow that such was the case at Olbia also. Nor are there any Olbian 
inscriptions which refer to Ares. 

However, there is some numismatic evidence for the cult. Three coins 
are given in the Berlin catalogue (Nos. 136-188), with a standing figure of 


Fic. 9.—BronzE ΟΟΙΝ OF OLBIA IN THE Bertin Museum. 


Ares as a reverse type. The first of these coins, No. 136, is reproduced here 
(Fig. 9).°° The reverse is thus described in the Berlin catalogue :— 

OABIOTT OAEITWN. Ares, standing, r., left hand leaning on lance. 
A in field to left. ; 

There is a bust of Geta on the obverse ; the other two Berlin coins are 
similar. This coin De Koehne'™ thinks represents the temple-statue of 
Achilles Pontarches, but there does not seem any ground for the assignation. 
Another coin given by Pick,}”? which does not appear in the Berlin catalogue, 
is also assigned to Achilles by De Koehne, but the figure, which is standing 
and holding a lance, seems more likely to be Ares. It looks like the copy of 
an archaic statue. The reverse type of this coin is a caduceus. These coins 
are all of late period. 


FHelwos. 


There is some very interesting numismatic evidence for the existence 
of this cult at Olbia. Coin No. 114 138. in the Berlin Catalogue. is thus 
described :— 

Obverse. Reverse. 
Head of Helios, facing, with rays. OA above two fore-parts of horses 
AB 5. | set back to back. 


119 Herod. iv. 59, 62. It appears in Pick’s plates (xii. i.). 
® The cast from which this photograph was 21 Loc, cit. i, p. 84. 
made, was obtained through the kindness of 18 ῬῚ, αι 31: 


Dr. H. Dressel, of the Royal Museum at Berlin, 123 Nos, 115, 116 are similar, 
as were others referred to below. 


"- 


Sm: ἃ 


THE CULTS OF OLBTA. 43 


This coin is given by Pick ; * it is apparently of rather early date. Von 
Sallet comments that these coins show traces of the rise of another type at 
Olbia. De Koehne ™ also describes them, and says that they are the only 
record we have of a cult of Helios here.° He thinks that this cult was 
introduced from Sinope to Olbia; as a coin of Sinope!” has a head of 
Helios, and on another coin a head with ZINQTI[EQN] between the rays 
occurs as counter-mark.’* It would seem more probable that the worship 
was introduced from Rhodes,” the special home of the cult of Helios. We 
have an apparent instance of the intimate relations between the two states 
at a rather later period in the inscriptions set up by Posideos which have 
been so often referred to. Another proof of the commercial intercourse 
between Rhodes and Olbia is the fact that jar-handles have been found near 
the latter city stamped with the name of Rhodes; as these, however, 
have been found in almost every part of the Greek world, the argument from 
them cannot be. pressed. 

There are no Olbian inscriptions which show the name of Helios, but 
there is one from Panticapaeum '*! of late period, and one from Gorgippia,!” 
of 41 A.D., both of which relate to the manumission of slaves. In each of 
these the same formula occurs.— 


ὑπὸ Ada, Γῆν, Ἥλιον. 


For this formula Latyschev 138. compares an inscription from Thermae in 
Aetolia,* which also refers to the manumission of a slave. 


The Moseuri. 


Head says that the worship of the Dioscuri was very prevalent on 
the shores of the Euxine. We have two pieces of evidence for the existence 
of the cult at Olbia. One is a marble tablet, on which is a fragmentary 
inscription of the third or second century B.c.%° Above the inscription 
are the two caps of the Dioscuri, and half a star, with apparently the remains 
of another half. The other is a coin, given by Pick (Pl. X. 31), of which 
there are two examples in the Berlin Catalogue (No. 67, 68). The reverse 
of this coin shows a dolphin between the caps of the Dioscuri, and above a 


858. ῬῚ ix, 31. 18 Biichsenschiitz, Besitz und Hrwerb, p. 

125 loc.cit. p. 58, 59. 422-4. See Jnser. Grace. Insul, Maris Aeg. 

126 Note that the Berlin catalogue gives a i. p. 175, (appendix on Rhodian jar-handles), 
coin, No. 32, with Heracles as a reverse type, anc 4180 an exhaustive article by Becker, (MJélanges 
‘over the head a small round counter-mark with = réco- Rum. vol. i. p. 416). 


youthful Helios-head with rays.’ it Lat. ii. 54. 
127 Mionnet. Suppl. iv. p. 574, 181. . 131 Lat. ii. 400. 
28 British Museum Catalogue, ‘ Pontus,’ PI. 1281 98, 

xxii. 15 (date circa. B.c, 290-250). 134. Dittenberger, Sy//. ii. 887 (2nd edit. ). 
129 But note the possible adoption from Si- 1% Historia Numorum, p. 235, (under Istros). 


nope of the eagle standing on fish, as reverse 136 Latyschev, i. 18, C./.@. ii. add. p. 1000. 
type, referred to under Demeter. No. 2083. b. 


= 


44 α. Μ. HIRST 


large star. De Koehne'*’ explains the dolphin as emblematic of the con- 
nection of the Dioscuri with the sea as the protectors of mariners. He 
gives several coins of Panticapaeum which bear their symbols; they also 
appear very frequently on the coins of Tanais, and of Dioscurias in Colchis- 
From their connection with navigation, too well known to require illustration, 
we should naturally expect to find a cult of the Dioscuri at Olbia, and the 
marble and the coin supply sufficient confirmatory evidence. 


The Cabiri. 


The Cabiri must be taken next to the Dioscuri, in view of their close 
relationship. A very interesting inscription relating to this cult at Olbia 
was discovered in 1897.!°8 It is on a base of white marble, and is assigned 
by Latyschev to the second century B.c. It is as follows :— 


EvBiotos ᾿Αρίστωνος 
’ ΄ ΄ 
Emixpatn(v) Νικηρώτου 
τὸν θεῖον 
θεοῖς τοῖς ἐν Σαμοθράικη[(} 
ἱερησάμενον. 


This is the only mention of the cult of the Cabiri at Olbia, and apparently 
in the whole North Euxine district, so it is of special importance. A cult of 
the Cabiri at Miletus is known,’ apparently in the temple of the Didy- 
maean Apollo, and it may have come to Olbia from the mother city; or 
direct from Samothrace, as the form of the inscription (θεοῖς τοῖς ἐν Σαμο- 
θράικη 41] would suggest. We have seen that Demeter, Hermes, and 
Dionysus, and possibly the Dioscuri, were all objects of cult at Olbia, and as 
these deities were bound up with the Samothracian worship it is natural 
that a cult of the Cabiri should be found there also. 


A sklepvos. 


There are two pieces of evidence for the existence of a cult of Asklepios 
at Olbia. The first is merely incidental,—the reference in the Protogenes 
decree 1 to τὸν [πύργον] ᾿Εἰπιδαυρίον, from which it has been supposed that 
there was a temple of Asklepios near by, which gave its name to the tower. 
The other,—the bas-relief found at Olbia, and referred to by De Koehne 1— 
is more important. Mr. Rouse Ce ok rg totes that the seated 


187 loc. cit. p. 57. 141 Joc, cit. p. 7. The relief is given by 
188 Lat. iv. 27. Note that Latyschev thinks Uvarov Recherches sur les Antiquités de la 
the absence of the (v) in the 2nd. lineisthestone- Russie méridionale, 120, Taf. 13. 


cutter’s error, as it would be unusual for the. 12 Greek Votive Offerings, p. 20. Mr. Rouse 

uncle’s name to be omitted, is here following the author of the article Heros 
139 0.7.4. 2882, in Roscher’s Lexicon (i. 2571), who suggests the 
140 Lat. i. 16, Β. 46, attribution of the relief to Achilles. 


ei δ. 


—=—~ ὼς τ Ν 


THE CULTS OF OLBIA. 45 


figure in this relief is Achilles. But an examination seems to make this 
impossible; on the wall hangs the representation of a human trunk, 
apparently dedicated as a votive offering. This is surely decisive in favour 
of regarding Asklepios as the subject of the relief. Uvarov considered 
this relief as the most important work of the kind found at Olbia. These 
two items of evidence seem enough to make good the claim of Asklepios to 
a place among the cult deities of Olbia, which his close connection with 
Apollo would make probable even without such direct testimony. 

We have two inscriptions from the Euxine district referring to 
Asklepios; one, of Roman period, from Chersonesus,* directs that a copy of 
the decree shall be placed 


ἐν τῶι ἱερῶι τοῦ ᾿Ασκλαπιοῦ. 
The other is from Panticapaeum,™ and may be quoted in full. 


“a 3 a fel > / 
Θεῴ ᾿Ασκληπιῷ σωτῆρι καὶ εὐεργέτῃ 
\ , ΦκΖ 4 U 
τὴν τράπεζαν ἀνέστησε Στρατόδημος 
. Μενεστράτου. 


Achilles Pontarches. 


The question as to whether the cult of Achilles Pontarches at Olbia was 
of Greek or Scythian origin has been already discussed in the Introduction ; 
it remains now to deal with the epigraphic and other evidence for the exist- 
ence of the cult at Olbia. Dion Chrysostom “® is the literary authority for 
this ; he says :---τοῦτον [i.c. Achilles] μὲν yap ὑπερφυῶς τιμῶσι, καὶ νεὼν τὸν 

boy a ΄ κι) ΄ , δ, \ eee, a , er 
μὲν ἐν TH νήσῳ τῇ ᾿Αχιλλέως καλουμένῃ ἵδρυνται, Tov δὲ ἐν TH πόλει, ὥστε 
οὐδὲ ἀκούειν ὑπὲρ οὐδενὸς ἄλλου θέλουσιν ἢ Ὃ μήρου. καὶ τἄλλα οὐκέτι 

A e ͵ \ \ > / ὰ > tal a la μὰ ’ 
σαφῶς ἑλληνίζοντες διὰ τὸ ἐν μέσοις οἰκεῖν τοῖς βαρβάροις ὅμως τήν γε 
᾿Ιλιάδα ὀλέγου πάντες ἴσασιν ἀπὸ στόματος. It is not quite clear whether 
Dio here means by ‘the island of Achilles’ Leuke or Berezan, a small island 
at the mouth of the Borysthenes. Escher!*? and Fleischer “S both take 


- the view that Berezan is meant,!*° and it seems on the whole more likely. 


There was, of course, also a temple on the island of Leuke. Leuke and 
Berezan have constantly been confused, both by ancient and*modern writers, 
with each other, and with the δρόμσς ᾿Αχιλλέως,---αὶ narrow tongue of land 
south of Olbia and the mouth of the Borysthenes, with its west end in the 
sea, and its east in a bay, and only joined to the mainland by a narrow strip 


M43 See Mr. Rouse himself, Joc. cit. p. 210- Achilleus. 


212, on the custom ‘of dedicating models of 48 In Roscher's Lex. 8.0. Achilleus. 

the diseased part... Votive eyes... make up 49 This is the view of Koehler, but Latyschey 

two-fifths of the whole number. Nezt to the — thinks Leuke is meant (op, cit. i. p. 167). It 

eye comes the trunk.’ ἀν. should be noted that C.1.G. 2. 2076 (=Lat. i. 
14 Lat. i. 189. ᾿ 77), which Fleischer quotes as being found on 
M5 Lat. ii. 80. *Berezan, Latyschev says is of uncertain attribu- 
M6 Orat, xxxvi. 439. M. tion. 


47 In Pauly-Wissowa, Real.-Encycl. s.v. 
a. 


40 ᾿ 6. Μ. HIRST 


of land in the middle. ΑἸ] three places were sacred to Achilles Pontarches, ΕἾ 
From so late an author as Dio, of course, nothing can be proved as to the 
antiquity of the cult, except that one of such importance was not very likely 
to be of recent introduction. That Achilles was from very early times wor- 
shipped as the tutelary deity of the North Euxine we know from the line 
of Alcaeus already quoted.. We have no very early Oibian inscription 
referring to Achilles, but one very important one ! is dated by Latyschev early 
in the first century. B.c.; and is undoubtedly of the period before the city 
was destroyed, 1.6. probably 150 years before Dio’s visit. The inscription in 
question is a decree in -honour of Nikeratos, son of Papias, who had protected 
the citizens from the enemy, and now was decreed a public funeral. In it 
the words occur :—év T&L... ἀγῶνι τἀχιλλεῖ κατὰ TO πυθόχρηστον τῆς 
ἱπποδρομίας. 

Though this is the earliest Achilles-inscription from Olbia itself, we have 
a much earlier one from close at hand. At the mouth of the Borysthenes 
and Hypanis rivers was the Alsos Hecates, a sandy tongue of land at the end 
of the peninsula now called Kinburn. -In the sea at some distance to the 
west of this point, some fishermen in 1885 dragged up in their nets a stone 
altar, with the inscription 


εἰ οἱ 
ἃ «ἃ, 


᾿Αχώλλεῖ. 
τὸμ βωμὸν 


καὶ τὸ κέδρον."""} 


Latyschev dates this as fourth or certainly third century B.c. It is 
of great: interest and importance, as indicating that the cult of Achilles on 
the North Euxine. was even more widespread than had been thought.’ It 
would seem that there must have been a temple, or at least an altar, of 
Achilles, at the Alsos Hecates, where he was worshipped probably by fisher- 
men, as the tongue of land does not appear to have been'inhabited. How- 
ever, as the altar was found at. some distance out at sea, the sand-bank may 
have shifted its position. 

We have an inscription of the same date or a little earlier (fourth 
century B.C.) from the island of Leuke,'” a dedication by a citizen of Olbia 
to Achilles : — : ; 
[Ὁ δεῖνα Δη]μοστράτο(υ) ᾿Αχιλλεῖ 
[Λευκ]ῆς μεδέοντι Ὀλβιοπολέτ[η]ς, 


which may be taken as evidence of the existence of the cult in Olbia itself 
in comparatively early times.!°* Also there was found on the island of Leuke 
an important decree! of the people of Olbia in honour of some person, 
apparently an inhabitant of the island, dated by Latyschev at the end of the 
fourth or beginning of the third century B.c. A fragmentary proxenos- 


18. 4. AT. 183 Lat, i. 172, 
151 Lat. iv. 68, 154 For the form of the dedication cp, the 
‘82 Note also a fragmentary inscription from one at Neapolis by Posideos ᾿Αχιλλεῖ γήσον 
Neapolis of the second century B.c. ; apparently [μεδέοντι]. Lat. i. 244. 
a dedication to Achilles (Lat. iv. 191), Tat i071; 


THE CULTS OF OLBITA, 47 


inscription “* of the same period, found at Olbia, he also thinks refers to 
some inhabitant of Leuke. But according to ancient authors the island was 
deserted, and sailors were forbidden to spend the night there,” from which 
it would seem that the persons honoured by these decrees were priests or 
curators of the temple of Achilles at Leuke. If the island mentioned by Dio 
was Leuke, it might be inferred that the temple there was in change of the 
people of Olbia. 

For the importance of the cult in the later period of the city we have 
abundant evidence in the series of dedicatory inscriptions given by 
Latyschev,’’ belonging probably to the: second or third century after Christ. 
These inscriptions, though not found actually on the site of Olbia,’” 
Latyschev thinks quite certainly belong to the city, both from the similarity 
of the formulas to those of undoubtedly Olbian inscriptions, and also because 
nearly all the names given in these inscriptions are found in others from 
Olbia. Some have thought this series belonged to the town of Odessos, but 
it was too small to have had five archons and six praetors, or to have had 
the games referred to in some of the inscriptions. One curious point of 
contrast between these inscriptions and those to Apollo Prostates, which 
belong to the same period, is that in the latter the gift is always 
mentioned, whereas in the former it is merely called χαριστήριον ; except 
in 81, where it is a στέφανος, (given by a priest), and in 77, where even 
χαριστήριον is omitted. No, 79 may be quoted as an example of these 
inscriptions :— 

᾿Αγαθῇ τύχῃ ᾿Αχιλλεῖ Ποντάρχηι 
οἱ περὶ Καλλισθένην Σατύρου στρατηγοί, 
Μηνόδωρος ἸΠοντικοῦ, 
Νάβαζος Νουμηνίου, 
᾿Αχιλλεὺς Συν(τ)ρόφου, 
ΡΟΝ: Βάδαγος ᾿ἸΙεζδράδου, 
Δάδαγος Κουζαίου, 
ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως εὐσταθίας καὶ τῆς 
ἑαυτῶν ὑγείας χαριστήριον. 


No, 82 is worthy of note, because the dedication is to ᾿Αχιλλεῖ Ποντάρχῃ 
καὶ @éridi. A cult of Achilles, Thetis, and the Nereids is known at 
Erythrae in Ionia.1° 

It should be noticed that the name Achilles is of frequent occurrence 
at Olbia; twelve instances of it appear in the inscriptions given by 
Latyschev. 

Whether we have any numismatic evidence for the cult of Achilles at 
Olbia is doubtful. De Koehne ™ gives three coins which he thinks represent 


6 Lat. i. 13. Latyschey quotes Uvarov, (Rech, p. 32). Lat. 
7 Seyl. Peripl. 68 ; Arrian. Per. 32; Anon. _ iv. 18, issaid actua!ly to have been found among 
Peripl. 66; Amm. Mare. xxii. 8, 35;~Max. _ the ruins of Olbia. 


Tyr. diss. xx. 7 ; Philostr, Heroic. 20, 85. 160 Dittenberger, SyZ/.2600; Michel, Recwei?, 
. 48 i. 77-83, iv. 17-19. 839, Β. 2, 27. 
1 For the dispersion of the stones of Olbia, 161 Joe cit. i. p, 84, 85, 88, 
> 


48 G. Μ. HIRST 


Achilles. Two of these we have already seen are with more probability 
assigned to Ares. The third coin may possibly represent Achilles. It appears 
to be similar to that given by Pick, Pl. xii. 2, but not the same coin, De 
Koehne describes the reverse type of this coin thus :— ; 
OABIOTIOAEITWN. Homme nu, tourné ἃ gauche, posant le pied droit 
sur une élévation et tenant dans la droite un objet indistinct. Devant lui 
une meta. Dans le champ Lr. . 
If the object really is a meta, the coin may reasonably be assigned to 
Achilles, and would be the solitary instance of his appearance upon the 


coins of Olbia. 


Heracles. 


The head of Heracles is a not infrequent type on Olbian coins. We 
should expect to find him a special object of worship at Olbia, in view of 
his connection with the North, familiar enough from Pindar (Olymp. iii.), 
with which may be compared the passage where Herodotus says that the 
Greeks dwelling about the Pontus relate that Heracles, after taking the 
cattle of Geryon, passed through Scythia, and then came és τὴν Ὑλαίην 
καλεομένην yhv,' recalling at once Pindar’s 


τόθι δένδρεα θάμβαινε σταθείς. 


Herodotus also relates! that in Exampaeus, a district not far from OJbia, 
was shown a footprint of Heracles; however, throughout Greek lands 
Heracles seems to have had attributed to him objects similar to those which 
in England are usually assigned to the devil,—the Devil’s Arrows, Devil’s 
Punchbowl, etc.,—so the footprint here has most likely no particular signifi- 
cance. His cult was so widespread that we have probably no right to claim 
any special local importance for it at Olbia, but his legendary connection with 
the North, as in the case of Apollo, would make him seem a fitting object of 
worship there. ; 

The epigraphic evidence for the cult of Heracles at Olbia is rather 
curious. Latyschev '® gives an inscription which is carved on a stone very 
similar to the gravestones in use at Athens in the fourth century B.c., and 
apparently made of Attic marble. It has been thought, therefore, that the 
block may have been sent out to Olbia from Athens for sepulchral purposes 
and then, having for some reason or other not been thus used, may have been 
appropriated to this dedication. The inscription is most fragmentary and 
was evidently purposely defaced in antiquity; it is restored thus by 
Latyschev :— 

[Κλεόμβροτος Ἰ]αντακλέους 

ἀνέθ]ηκε τ[ὸν πύρ- 

γον] ᾿Ἡ[ρ]α[κλε] 
[καὶ] τῶι δήμ[ω]ι. 


105 ἀν. 8,9. that on the other side is an inscription of much 
163 Herod. iv. 82. later date, given i. 67. 
164 Joc, cit. i. 99. It should be said also 


THE CULTS OF OLBIA. 49 


Then follows an epigram of six lines, of which the first two may be quoted :— 


“Hpax{[A]ec[s], σοὶ [7 ]ovde Κλεόμβροτος εἴσ[ α]τίο π]Ίύρ[γο]ν 
- καὶ δήμωι, ποταμ[ οὔ τ]οῦδε [πα]ρ᾿ ἠϊόνα]. 
(We have instances of towers being built by private individuals in the Proto- 
genes decree’), The inscription'® in which Hermes and Heracles are 
mentioned together has already been noticed. It is curious that in this also 
there are signs that it was wilfully destroyed, from which, Latyschev says, it 
might be conjectured that at some time or other the cult of Heracles was 
abolished at Olbia, and his name upon the monuments erased. 

Inscriptions from some other places on the North Euxine contain the 
name of Heracles. One from Panticapaeum,!® of the year 216 A.D., 
begins :—Tov dd’ Ἡρακλέους καὶ Εὐμόλπου τοῦ Ποσειδῶνος καὶ ἀπὸ 
προγόνων βασιλέων βασιλέα Τιβέριον ᾿Ιούλιον Ρησκούποριν.. 

This legendary genealogy would seem to explain why the various 
emblems of Poseidon and Heracles are found on the coins of the Kings of 
the Bosporus.'® 

With regard to the numismatic evidence for the cult of Heracles at 
Olbia, eight coins bearing his head are given by De Koehne, seven are repro- 
duced in Pick’s plates, and there are three in the Berlin catalogue (none in 
the British Museum). Pick’s examples fall into two sharply defined classes. 
Three coins’? have youthful heads of Heracles, with the lion-skin; the 
types are different, but they are all of fairly good style, all beardless, and all 
looking to the right ; the reverse of each is a club. The first two examples in 
Pick are silver, and resemble No. 32 in the Berlin catalogue; the third is 
copper, and is similar to Nos. 117, 118 in the Berlin catalogue. No. 117 is 
thus described :— 


Obverse. . Reverse. 
Youthful “head of Heracles, with | OABIO above a club horizontally 
lionskin, r. Two faint round counter- | placed. Below EIABA. (ἢ 5). 


marks, 


Von Sallet thinks that BA on the reverse of this coin perhaps stands for 
Βασιλεύς, either a priest’s title, or a reference to the Scythian kings. The 
latter seems more likely, in view of the last-quoted inscription from Panti- 


capaeum, as other Scythian kings peaen those of the Bosporus may have 


claimed descent from Heracles. 
The other four coins given by Pick! have heads of quite a different 


style from the preceding, and with differing reverse types. They are all’ 


166 Latyschv, B11. 169 Perhaps the dedication from Pantica- 
166 Tat. iv. 459. _ paeum (Lat. iv. 200) to Διὲ Tevdpxm should 
ΟΝ Tat. i, 245. from Nikita, probably 3rd δὲ compared with this. 
ΠΟ eontury B.C. ; Lat. ii. 24, from Panticapaeum 170 Pl, x, 18-20; cp. Berlin Catalogue, 32, 
er teespel B.c. ; and Lat. ii. 350, from 117, 118. 
of 2nd century Bo, “Il Pl, x.4 21-25; ep. De Koehne, loc, cit. 
ee ee om p. 48. No. 54, 
i 


50 G. M. HIRST 


silver, and the heads on the obverse are of a coarse heavy type, all turned to 
the left, and more-or less similar. 
No. 21, is a vertical club enclosed in a wreath formed by two ears of corn; 
No. 22 has a wreath; No, 24 a bow in case placed over a club, and No. 23 a 
vertical bow in case.!” 

It is perhaps worth while to note, in discussing Heracles’ connection 


with Olbia, that the name Καλλίένεκος, which so often occurs in literature 


as an epithet of Herakles, appears twice in Olbian -inscriptions,!” both of 
early date. 


The River-god Borysthenes. 


We have more numismatic evidence of this cult than of any other 
represented on Olbian coins, except that of Apollo ; judging from the number 
of specimens contained in all the collections, more coins must have been 
struck with the head of the Borysthenes upon them than with any other 
type. The Berlin collection has 26 out of a total of 126 (besides several 
acquired since the appearance of the catalogue) ; the British Museum 9 out 
of 23; the Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge 4 out of 7; and De Koehne, 
out of about 160 coins, has 26 (which he assigns to the river Hypanis). This 
‘predominance of the river-god at Olbia is readily explained by the consider- 
ation that in South Russia the rivers are by far the most imposing natural 
features of the country,!”4 and as such would be almost certain to become 
objects of worship to the early settlers. We know from Herodotus! that 
the Scythians worshipped the Danube. Of the Borysthenes in particular 
Professor Percy Gardner 176 says :—‘ We find traces of a peculiar veneration 
paid by the Greek colonists of Olbia to the river Borysthenes, whose head 
appears on their coins. ‘This head is clearly modified in type in imitation of 
the physiognomy of the Scythians who inhabited the steppes of the river, 
and to whose physiognomy it bears a striking resemblance.’ These Scythian 
characteristics of the coin-types will be easily seen from the accompanying 
illustration (Fig. 10). Rivers have such a distinctively local character 
that it is particularly easy to personify them. They often appear on coins 
in the form of a bull. Can the striding bull, which is the obverse type of 
an Olbian coin, be taken as a personification of the river-god?17 This 
hardly seems likely, in view of the other series of Borysthenes coins, but 
the coin is apparently quite late. There is another. coin, of Imperial date, 
which has a bull as reverse type.”8 The series in the illustration belongs to 


another type,—‘ a human figure, with human face and a shaggy beard, but ἢ 


172 Of these coins De Koehne says, ‘ Les 
dernitres piéces de ce type indiquent déja une 
époque de décadence.’ 

173 Lat. i. 12, 114. 

174 Cp. Herod. iv. 47 ; e¢ seg. and esp. iv. 82, 
Θωμάσια δὲ ἡ χώρῃ αὕτη οὐκ ἔχει, χωρὶς ὅτι ποτα- 
μούς τε πολλῷ μεγίστους καὶ ἀριθμὸν πλείστους. 

175 Herod. iv. 59. 


176 Transactions of Royal Soc. of Literature, 
vol. xi. second series, p. 174, e¢ seq. 
’ U7 Pick, Pl. xi. 23, Berlin Catalogue, 132, 
De Koehne, Joc. cit, p. 84, explains it as refer- 
ring to the fact that the wealth of Olbia largely 
consisted in cattle. 

178 Pick, Pl. xii. 3. 


The reverse type of Pick’s example, ἡ 


THE CULTS OF OLBIA. 51 


with the forehead, horns, and ears of an οχ.Ἅ 1 At Olbia, however, no more 
than the head appears on the coins. 

~The coins!’ themselves can be best discussed with reference to the 
accompanying Fig. 10; they are only differentiated in the Berlin and British 
Museum Catalogues by the monograms on the reverse, but the heads of the 
river-gods on the obverse are of very different types. 

The first coin (a) illustrated 181 is not Scythian in type; the artist seems 
to have been anxious to get as close to the bull-form as possible ; it is a bull’s 
head slightly humanised. The forehead with its short horns and the beard 
are especially bovine. One would suppose that here the die-cutter was 
copying a type from another coin; at all events there is nothing local 
about it. 

The second coin (0) 152 shows a head which is an approximation to the 
Scythian type, but the forehead and short horns are still those of a bull; the 


e d St 
Fie. 10.—Bronze Coins oF OLBIA IN THE BERLIN Museum. 


bull’s ears are less distinct than in No: 1. The hair is still of the conventional 
river-god type, and looks as if it were dripping. 

The head on the obverse of the third coin (@) 158. is rather curious ; it is now 
wholly human, except for the short horns on the forehead which mark the 
river-god, and the human ears are very clear. But the type is more conven- 
tional and less Scythian than the two which follow. It seems surprising 


181 Pick, Pl. ix. 26 (Imhoof-Blumer collec- 


7 Professor Jebb, on βούπρῳρος, Sophocles, 


Trach. 13. The Achelous appears thus on an 
archaic coin of Metapontum in Lucania, 
Millingen, Anc. Coins of Grk.:Cities and Kings, 
Pl. i. 21. The coin given by Head, Hist, Num. 
p- 63, is not the same. 

180 The casts from which these photographs 
were made were furnished by the kindness of 
Dr. Dressel. 


tion). 

182 Pick, ix. 27 (obverse only ; the reverse 
numbered 27, belongs to the third coin (4) in 
the present illustrations), Imhoof- Blumer collec- 
tion. An example is in the British Museum, 
No. 10, cut on p.-12 (Catal. ‘ Thrace’). 

183 Tmhoof-Blumer collection. 


E 2 


63 6. M. HIRST. 


that Pick should not have given this head among his examples, as it is quite 
distinctive. . 

The next coin (ὁ) is perhaps the most typically Scythian of the five ; the 
coin is not struck evenly, so no room is left for the horns to show. No doubt 
they were on the die, but everything else about the head is as human, and as 
Scythian, as possible, of the type from which the well-known heads of Pan 
on the coins of Panticapaeum were developed. The Scythians on the vase 
of Xenophantos, already referred to, are of the same general type ; compare too 
the wounded Scythians on a very interesting piece of gold work from South 
Russia.!®> The left-hand figure of the four has a profile very like the second 
head in the coins represented here. 

The last (7) of the Borysthenes coins 36 represented here also shows dis- 
tinctly Scythian features, but the horns are plainly seen, and the hair is 
more like that of the conventional river-god. 

All these coins have similar reverse types (b),—a battle-axe and bow in 
case,!*’—s0 the Scythian river-god is associated with the Scythian weapons, 
and the obverse and reverse types are alike purely local.®* This is the 
special interest possessed by this series of coins; like the representations of 
Scythians on-the vases, it shows that there were artists at Olbia who por- 
trayed the men they saw around them, instead of merely perpetuating 
conventional types, It has already been urged that the appearance of these 
Scythian heads among others that are wholly Greek seems to show a racial 
feeling on the part of the artist, which would indicate that Olbia remained a 
purely Greek city, at any rate during its earlier and more prosperous days. 
These coins are said in the British Museum catalogue to be earlier than the 
time of Alexander the Great; De Koehne thinks that they extend over a 
period of more than a century. When once a mixed population of Greeks 
and Scythians had arisen, naturally this type would not be perpetuated on the 
coins. But we should have expected that the Borysthenes would have 
continued in some form or other as a coin-type, considering in how large a 
measure the prosperity of the city depended on the river. It must be 
remembered, too, that one of the city’s names, and apparently the earliest, 
was Borysthenes. Herodotus speaks ofthe city by this name in his narrative 
of Scyles, and also calls the townsmen Borysthenites, though he notices 139 
that they preferred to call themselves Olbiopolitans. The actual name Olbia 
is not found in Herodotus. 


184 In the Berlin collection, but not in the 
catalogue ; Pick’s coin (Pl. ix. 28) is similar, 
but not the same. 
᾿ 18 Comple Kendu, 1864, p. 142. 

186 Berlin Catalogue, No. 98, Pick’s coin, Pl, 
ix, 29, is not unlike this, but the resemblance 
is not very close. 
᾿ 187 The coin given by Pick (Pl. ix. 32) already 
noted as being ascribed by De Koehne to 


Poseidon should probably be assigned to this . 


series, as ‘the reverse type is the same. The 


type of the head on the obverse is different from 
those given ; it is very large, almost filling up 
the surface of the coin, and the horns cannot 
be seen on the forehead, 

188 An Olbian inscription found in 1900 
(Lat. iv. 460), of the fourth century B.c., refers 
to archery contests held at Olbia. These must 
have been imitated from the Scythians, as 
Greeks in other places do not seem to have had 
them. 

189 Herod., iv. 18. 


ve 7 
+ <i) - . 
= μ᾿ ᾿, 4 

rn 


rm ~~ ΜΡ | 
EE OULTS OF OLBIA. 53 


_ The purely Hellenic character of the religion of Olbia seems to be 

| rated by the facts above presented ; there is no trace of any merely 
a local pe except the Borysthenes, who is of course only an apparent excep- 
_ tion, as the neighbouring river is a figure that constantly appears on the coins 
“of Greek states. Local colour is supplied by the Scythian bow and arrows, 
Pina perhaps by the sturgeon ; the other types can hardly be said to be in any 
ο΄ ΨΥ distinctive. — 


G. M. Hirst. 


THE METHOD OF DECIDING THE PENTATHLON. 


THE difficulty of this question is due to the scanty and unsatisfactory 
character of the literary evidence. Such evidence as we do possess consists 
of a few allusions in early classical authors, mostly poetical and metaphorical, 
and of the explanations of these passages given by scholiasts and lexico- 
graphers of uncertain date and authority. The question can only be 
solved by framing hypotheses which will explain as far as possible these 
scanty allusions. But in such a case it is not sufficient for a hypothesis to 
satisfy the literary evidence; it must also conform to common sense and 
probability. We may take it for granted—and the more one studies the 
subject, the more certain one feels—that the Greeks possessed a knowledge 
of athletics little, if at all, inferior to our own. Now there are two conditions 
which are essential to the success of an athletic meeting— Fairness and Order. 
The arrangements must ensure absolute fairness for all competitors, and they 
must ensure the comfort of spectators and competitors alike by avoiding 
useless waste of time, frequent shifting of the scene, unnecessary repetitions, 
or tedious complications. The sense of Fairness and of Order was character- 
istic of the Greek mind, and no theory of Greek athletics can be satisfactory 
which fails to satisfy these two conditions. Quite an extensive literature. 
has already sprung up around the Pentathlon, especially in Germany. Un- 
fortunately in too many cases the writers have set about to improvise a 
system of athletics out of their inner consciousness with no practical 
experience to guide them. Hence their whole theories are often ruined by 
some false and unnecessary assumption with which they have started. My 
object is to examine the various hypotheses which have been proposed, and 
the assumptions on which they rest, and to apply to them the double test of 
Fairness and Order, in the hope that by eliminating such elements in them as 
do not satisfy the conditions of the problem, we may arrive if not at the 
certainty of the truth, at least at an approximation to the truth. This 
truth will I believe be found to be marked by the Greek virtue of 
simplicity. 


1.—The Theory of a Fivefold Victory. 


The old hypothesis that victory in all five events was necessary may be 
briefly dismissed. Had this been the case, the crown for the Pentathlon 
would have been scarcely ever awarded, whereas in the list of Olympic victors 


THE METHOD OF DECIDING THE PENTATHLON. 55 


Η recently discovered in an Oxyrhynchus papyrus! the victor in the Pentathlon 


is recorded regularly. 


Moreover a scholiast to Aristides? expressly informs 
us that ‘three out of the five events were sufficient for victory.’ 


The idea 


seems to have arisen from the well known epigram of Simonides* and from 
a misunderstanding of a passage in Herodotus, which is in reality a conclusive 


proof against it. 


Herodotus (ix. 33) says that Tisamenus παρ᾽ ἕν πάλαισμα 
ἔδραμε νικᾶν ᾿Ολυμπιάδα, ἹΙερωνύμῳ τῷ ᾿Ανδρέῳ ἐλθὼν ἐς ἔριν. 


Pausanias 


(vi. 14) confirms the wictery of Hieronymus, and in another passage (iil. 11. 6) 


says of Tisamenus 


‘ra δύο γε ἣν πρῶτος. καὶ γὰρ δρόμῳ τε ἐκράτει καὶ 


πηδήματι᾽ ἹἹερώνυμον, καταπαλαισθεὶς δὲ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἁμαρτὼν τῆς νίκης 


KT. 


Hermann ‘ interprets Herodotus as saying that Tisamenus won not two 


but all four events, and only missed the prize by being defeated in the 
wrestling. This interpretation, repeated by Dr. Marquardt,> is obviously 
wrong. The words παρ᾽ ἕν πάλαισμα are not the same as μόνη πάλη, and 


mean not ‘ wrestling alone’ but a ‘single contest or fall.’ 


Again if Tisamenus 


won four events, why does Pausanias expressly say that he won two? Lastly 
applying the test of fairness, is it not ridiculous to suppose that a solitary 
victory in wrestling should have not only cancelled the four victories of 
Tisamenus, but actually given Hieronymus the prize ? 


The true interpretation of the passage is obvious: 
within a single πάλαισμα of victory,’ 1.6. he won two events but lost the odd. 


‘Tisamenus came 


Can we not go further and give πάλαισμα its accurate meaning of ‘a fall in 


wrestling ’ ? 


He came within a ‘single fall’ of winning. Each had won two 


events, each had scored two falls® in the wrestling, and the whole contest 
depended on the last fall! Just as we talk of losing a golf match by a single 
putt, or winning a rubber by. the odd trick. Such a graphic touch is surely 
just what one would expect from Herodotus. 


2.—Dr, Pinder’s Theory.” 


The distinctive feature of this theory is that at each stage in the 
competition the number of competitors is reduced by one till only two are 


~ 1 Oxyrhynchus Papyri, ii. 88. 
2 Schol. Aristides, Pan. Frommel p. 112. 
- 8 Ἴσθμια καὶ Πυθοῖ Διοφῶν ὁ Φίλωνος ἐνίκα 
ἅλμα ποδωκείην δίσκον ἄκοντα πάλην. 
Aor oe De Sogenis Aeginetae victoria, 


ad x Parasia Gymn. Programm. Gistrow, 
1886, pp. 18, 19. Since writing the above I 
find Hermann’s view restated and defended by 
“epee en in ‘Der Anufeinanderfolge 
fo prove his im Péentathion ’ (Miinchen, 1892). 
cae at he actually proposes to 


4 
.- 


Berl. 1867. 


‘he was first of all competitors in two events, 


- i.e. throwing the diskos and the spear, and 


further beat Hieronymus in running and 
jumping.” A theory which requires such 
gratuitous emendation surely needs no further 
comment. 

6 From the frequent allusions to ‘ three falls’ 
in wrestling, I assume that there were if neces- 
sary five bouts, but there may sometimes have 
been only three bouts, in which case two falls 
would decide the victory. 

7 Pinder, Ueber <gcale htl der sth 


50 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


left in the wrestling, the winner of which wins the whole Pentathlon. This 
result is attained by placing the jump first, and making it a test by which 
means only the first five are left in. The only evidence for this hypothesis 
is a passage in Plutarch ὃ comparing the contest between Alpha and the other 
letters to a Pentathlon, a highly metaphorical passage which has been a 
frequent stumbling block to writers on this question. Surely nothing can be 
more unscientific or unliterary than to build up a theory on the details of a 
metaphor or simile. How often does the thing compared correspond in every 
detail to that with which it is compared ? 

I need not repeat the arguments by which Professor Percy Gardner ὃ has 
already disproved this theory in Vol. I. of this Journal: it is sufficient to 
observe that according to Dr. Pinder a competitor might win the first four 
events and yet be beaten in the final, while one who had been beaten in all 
the first four, might yet, by winning the wrestling, prove the victor. 


3.—Theorees of a Triple Victory. 


The theories next to be discussed are based upon the assumption that 
a triple victory was necessary to secure the prize for the Pentathlon. How 
far this assumption is justified by the evidence, is a point which I will 
examine latér. The chief theories founded upon it are those of Professor 
Percy Gardner, Dr. Marquardt, and Dr. Fedde. 


3 A.— Professor Gardner’s Theory. ὦ 


Cases must have occurred where no competitor won three events. Was 
no prize awarded in such a case, or can we explain the triple victory in 
another way? Professor Gardner solves the difficulty by supposing that the 
Pentathlon was treated as a single event, and the competition conducted on 
the same principle as a boxing or wrestling tournament, the competitors 
being arranged in pairs, each pair contending against each other in all five 
contests. The winner of each pair, and therefore of the final pair, must 
necessarily then have won three out of five events. 

In case of an odd number of competitors there must have been a bye or 
ἔφεδρος. The ἔφεδρος was of course, as Prof. Gardner shows," only a bye for 
a particular round : in the next round lots would be drawn again, and prob- 
ably the bye would fall to some one else, To anyone who has the least 
acquaintance with athletics, this is so obvious as scarcely to need restating, 
were it not that Dr. Marquardt maintains the view that the ἔφεδρος once 
chosen remained an ἔφεδρος till the final round of the competition and he 


8 Plut. Quaest. Symp. ix. 2: διὸ τοῖς τρισὶν δευτερεύειν δὲ μηδέποτε μηδ᾽ ἀκολουθεῖν. 
ὥσπερ οἱ πένταθλοι περίεστι καὶ νικᾷ, τὰ μὲν πολλὰ 9 J.H.S., i. pp. 217-218. 
τῷ φωνᾶεν εἶναι, τὰ δ᾽ αὖ φωνάεντα ἐν τῷ δί- 10... Η-. 5. i. pp. 210 seq. 
χρονον, ταῦτα δ᾽ αὐτὰ τῷ πεφυκέναι καθηγεῖσθαι, 1 op, cit, 219. 


THE METHOD OF DECIDING THE PENTATHLON. 57 


draws a pathetic picture of the unhappy victor in the first heats of the race 
saving his strength as he toils over the deep sand (?) and looking anxiously 
to the spot where the ἔφεδρος stands fresh and ready to take him on when 
already exhausted by two or more heats.” 

There is at first sight a simplicity and fairness about Prof. Gardner’s 
theory that has caused it to be generally accepted in England. But the 
objections to it are very serious. A passage in Xenophon (Hell. vii. 4. 29) 
seems to me decisive against it. Speaking of the attack on Olympia by the 
Eleans when the Arcadians were conducting the .games, Xenophon says 
καὶ τὴν μὲν ἱπποδρομίαν ἤδη ἐπεποιήκεσαν καὶ τὰ ρα τα τοῦ πεντάθλου" 
οἱ δ᾽ εἰς πάλην ἀφικόμενοι οὐκ ἔτι ἐν τῷ δρόμῳ, ἀλλὰ μεταξὺ τοῦ δρόμου καὶ 
τοῦ βωμοῦ ἐπάλαιον. German writers seem to be correct in interpreting τὰ 
δρομικά as all the four events which took place in the Spomos, i.e. all the 
events except the wrestling. If this be so, there is no longer any ground 
for maintaining with Dr. Frazer ™ that wrestling was the second event 
in the Pontathion, an order which Prof. Gardner has shown to be absurd 
from a practical point of view, and which is now conclusively disproved 
by a passage of Bacchylides,® who expressly describes wrestling as the last 
event. But whether ta δρομικά is used of all the first four events or of 
the running only, the natural meaning of the passage is that the whole 
of the event or events so described took place before any of the wrestling 
began. The same ‘arrangement is implied in the words used by the 
Scholiast 16 of Phayllus and his record jump; τῶν πρὸ αὐτοῦ σκαπτόντων 
ν΄ πόδας καὶ τούτους πηδώντων ὁ Φαὔῦλλος ὑπὲρ τοὺς ν΄ πάνυ ἐπήδησεν. 
Prof. Gardner admits that this is the natural meaning of these passages, 
but suggests that they may refer to a particular heat, or to the final 
heat. But the natural interpretation is supported by practical consider- 
ations which seem to me fatal to his theory. The excessive strain of such a 


2 Marquardt op. cit. pp. 20, 21. The idea 
that the Greeks raced in soft sand is I believe 
entirely unfounded. It is based on Lucian’s 

- statement about runners practising in sand. 
The ground at Olympia is very hard in summer, 
was it broken up carefully before the race ? 

18 This distinction must be connected rather 
with the training places than with the actual 
sports. Thus Cleisthenes provided for the 

} suitors of Agarista καὶ δρόμον καὶ παλαίστρην 
(Hdt. vi. 126), and Pausanias mentions at 
Olympia besides the Gymnasium ‘where they 
practise for the Pentathlon and the races,’ a 
smaller enclosure ‘where the athletes practise 
wrestling’ (Paus. vi. 21). In the later form of 
the Stadium the semicircular theatre (σφενδόνη) 
would be the natural place for such.évents as 
boxing or wrestling. The simpler rectangular 
᾿ Stadium of Olympia however would. be less con- 
an ows alta Still it is no longer 
ssible to a ἢ this passage in Xenophon 

i 5 


Sort aioe ἐν ὩΣ 
, 


that the wrestling wswally took place in the 
Altis. For Martin Faber has shown (Philolo- 
gus, L. 495) that the following sentence—-oi γὰρ 
Ἠλεῖοι σὺν τοῖς ὅπλοις παρῆσαν ἤδη εἰς τὸ 
Téuevos—suggests that this arrangement was 
the exception rather than the rule (cf. Bury, 
Hist. of Greece, p. 621). The passage does not 
seem however decisive of what took Pee at 
Olympia. 
14 Frazer Pausanias iii. 488. 
15 Bacchylides ix. 30-36 with F. G. Kenyon’ 
note: 
τοῖος Ἑλλάνων δι᾽ ἀπείρονα κύκλον 
φαῖνε θαυμαστὸν δέμας, 
δίσκον τροχοειδέα ῥιπτῶν 
καὶ μελαμφύλλου κλάδον 4 
ἀκτέας ἐς αἰπεινὰν προπέμπων 
αἰθέρ᾽ ἐκ χειρὸς βοὰν ὥτρυνε λαῶν, 
ἣ τελευταίας ἀμάρυγμα πάλας. 
16 Schol. Lucian ad Somn. seu Gall. 6. 


58 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


competition has been well stated by Mr. Myers.’ No athlete after a severe 
bout of wrestling in the first round could have done himself justice in the 
lighter and more skilful exercises of the second round. The contest would 
have degenerated into a test of endurance, and the elements of skill, activity, 
and grace, which made it so popular, would have disappeared. Again the 
element of luck would have been greatly increased. A competitor who was 
drawn against a strong opponent and who like Hieronymus only won in the 
last round of the wrestling would be at an enormous disadvantage, compared. 
to one who meeting a weak opponent had won three out of the first four 
events. Still more would this be the case with an ἔφεδρος. In any competi- 
tion the bye has an advantage in the next round, but this advantage would 
be almost equivalent to certain victory in a competition where each round 
consisted of five events. 

If it were certain that the wrestling took place elsewhere than the 
Stadium, we should have another strong argument against this theory in the 
delay and confusion which would be caused by the constant movement of 
athletes and spectators backwards and forwards between the race-course and 
the wrestling place. At all events from a spectacular point of view: the 
competition would by being thus broken up Jose all its interest and dramatic 
effect and become extremely tedious to the spectators. Such arguments 
might be multiplied, and agreeing as they do with the natural interpretation 
of our authorities, they seem to me decisive against Prof. Gardner's hypo- 
thesis, though of those based upon the τριαγμός it is perhaps the best. 


3 B—Dr. Marquardt’s Theory. 


Another explanation of the τριαγμός is offered by Dr. Marquardt. By 
means of preliminary heats in the race, which he therefore places first, he 
reduces the number of competitors to five. These five competitors then 
compete against each other in each of the five events in pairs, lots being drawn 
afresh for each event. In each event we should have three rounds (τριαγμός), 
consisting of two pairs and a bye, one pair and a bye, and the final. Thus 
in the jump we should have 


Ist round: A v. B,  ν. D. E ἔφεδρος 
2nd round: AorB ν. CorD. E ἔφεδρος 
3rd round: the winner of the 2nd round, say A v. E..~ 


The winner A or E receives 3 marks; if E wins, A is second and 
obtains 2 marks, C or D is third and receives one mark; if A wins, there is 
no second, for on this system the bye has beaten no one, but C or D is 
third and receives one mark. The marks for wrestling are double those of 
the other events, and the prize is decided by the total of marks obtained. 


= 


7 J.H.S. vol. ii. 217. i ον 18 Marquardt, op. cit. pp. 16, 564... 


THE METHOD OF DECIDING THE PENTATHLON 59 


This most ingenious theory smacks of the midnight oil but surely not 
of the oil of the Palaestra. In the first place why does Dr. Marquardt reduce 
the number of competitors to that most inconvenient number five? Because, 
he says, five was a favourite number at Olympia (a five-yearly festival, a five 
days’ festival), and because in the mythical account given by Philostratus 
of the founding of the Pentathlon five heroes took part.!® Far stronger 
arguments might be adduced for the number three. But while it is 
natural to select a low odd number for the number of sets in a game, such 
as rackets, tennis or fives, or for the number of events or points in a com- 
petition decided by points, as in ὑπὸ University Sports, fencing or the 
Pentathlon itself, an odd number of competitors, involving as it does a bye, 
is the most inconvenient possible in a tournament, and a system which 
necessitates a bye is positively unfair. A bye always has an advantage in 
the next round, but is sometimes a necessary evil: but Dr. Marquardt 
gratuitously makes this evil a part of his system. 

Again can one imagine the Greeks guilty of so clumsy an arrangement ? 
In wrestling and boxing the tournament system is necessary; introduced 
into jumping, throwing the spear or the diskos, it would not only be tedious 
to spectators and competitors alike, but by prolonging the contest would 
give an undue preponderance to endurance as opposed to skill. If we must 
apply the τριαγμός to each event, let us say with Dr. Fedde” that each 
competitor had three throws, or three jumps ! 

Lastly why does Dr. Marquardt assign double marks to the wrestling ? 

. He has invented a difficulty for himself by misunderstanding Herodotus 
ix. 23. As I have shown,”! the obvious meaning of Herodotus is that 
Tisamenus. won two, but lost the odd event, being beaten by Hieronymus in 
the wrestling. Dr. Marquardt however believes that Tisamenus won four 
events, and Hieronymus, the victor in the whole Pentathlon, only the 
wrestling. Therefore Tisamenus had scored 4x3=12, Hieronymus at the 
most four seconds 4x2=8. But if wrestling only counted three, his score 
would be still only 11. Therefore wrestling manifestly counted 6 and 
Hieronymus scores 8+6=14, and wins. Q. E. D! 

Unfortunately there is a slight oversight in these calculations. Tisamenus 
as second in wrestling was surely entitled to two, if not four marks, and 
would therefore still be equal, if not ahead of Hieronymus. Let me present 
Dr. Marquardt with an explanation: Tisamenus was obviously an ἔφεδρος 
and could therefore count nothing, and so Hieronymus’ was still victor. 
Q. E. D! 

On an argument so sublime in its simplicity I need waste no more time, 
were it not that it involves the common misconception that wrestling was 
the most important event in the Pentathlon. There were three events 
peculiar to the Pentathlon. Philostratus describing the qualitities necessary 
for the Pentathlete ers stress-on the suppleness and elasticity which these 


σ' 


ον, Ph Nea Leipsig, 1889. Ν ' 
Fedde Uber den Panftamay αι Hell, 8.81. Os by 


60 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


three require,” but says nothing about either wrestling or running. Is it 
reasonable to suppose that more importance was attached in the Pentathlon 
to either wrestling or running, which had special competitions of their own, 
than to the three events which occurred in the Pentathlon and nowhere 
else? Again the Pentathlete was admired for his general development, and 
combination of activity and strength,’ and the most famous Pentathletes were 
certainly of the lighter type, such as Phayllus the jumper and the diskobolos, 
or Xenophon * the runner, whereas the wrestler even in the fifth century 
was notorious for bulk and weight. Moreover if special importance is to be 
attached to any one event, it is surely to the jump. For the Pentathlete 
was represented by sculptors carrying jumping weights.” The jump, as we 
learn from Pausanias, was especially accompanied by music.2° The Pent- 
athlete was proverbial for his powers of jumping,” and Pollux says of him 
expressly ἴδια αὐτῷ πηδᾶν, ἅλλεσθαι, πηδητικός, ἁλτικός, K.T:AS Such 
evidence, if it does not prove that the jump held the first place, is sufficient 
to prove the fallacy of assigning that position to wrestling. This miscon- 
ception, which vitiates most of the German theories on the subject, appears 
to me to be contrary to the whole spirit of the Pentathlon. 

Dr. Marquardt’s theory may be therefore rejected as inconsistent with 
the evidence and as not satisfying the conditions of fairness and order which 
are essential at athletic meetings. 


3 0.—Dr. Fedde’s Theory.® 


A still more artificial theory is that of Dr. Fedde. He supposes the 
normal number of competitors to have been twenty-four. Why? Because, 
forsooth, Plutarch in the passage referred to above compares the contest of 
Alpha and the other letters to the Pentathlon, and there are twenty-four 
etters in the alphabet. Further the number three is the characteristic 
number of the Pentathlon and enters into every detail. Therefore these 
twenty-four athletes are divided into eight heats of three, who compete 
against each other. The athlete who has won ail five events in his heat is 
the winner of the whole competition; if there are more than one such, the 
contest between them is decided by a new πάλαισμα. In his later work 
Dr. Fedde apparently modifies this theory by only allowing those who have 
won two at least out of the first four events in their heat to enter the final 
stage of wrestling, the victor in which is therefore the τρια κτήρ or winner of 
the whole Pentathlon. 

It is hardly worth while to criticise in detail so artificial a theory. 


2 Phil. Gymn. 81 cf. 11 γυμνάζεταί τι τῶν 7 Libanius ὑπὲρ τῶν ὀρχήστρ. p. 878 t. iii. 
τριῶν. : Reiske "τὸ νικᾶν ἐν τῷ πηδᾶν τοὺς πεντάθλους."᾽ 
38 Aristot. Rhet. 1. 5 διὸ of πένταθλοι κάλλιστοι 28 Pollux iii. 80. 161. For the whole subject 
ὅτι πρὸς βίαν καὶ πρὸς τάχος ἅμα πεφύκασιν. cf. cf. Krause, Gymn. und Agon, der Hell.,. pp. 


Plato Amat. 135 D. E. 482-484 and J.H.S. i. p. 215. 
“4 Pind. Ol. xiii. 29 Fedde, Gymn. Programm. Breslau, 1888, 
*5 Pausanias v. 27. 8, vi. 3.10. and Ueber den Fiinfkampf der Hell., Leipsig, 


6 ibid. v. 7. 4. . 1889, 


πα Στ} 


THE METHOD OF DECIDING THE ΡΕΝΤΑΤΗΙΟΝ. 61 


Martin Faber 39 has shown the fallacy of such arithmetical arguments, and 
the obvious unfairness of such a system. In its first form victory would 
depend entirely on the luck of the lot; the best athlete might be drawn 
against the second best, and so win only three victories, while an inferior 
athlete drawn against weak opponents might win five victories. In its second 
form a strong wrestler who, being drawn against two weak opponents, managed 
to win two of the first four events would be certain of the final victory. 
Were this the case we should expect to find the same name frequently among 
the winners of the Pentathlon and the wrestling ; whereas the only instance 
of this which I can find among the Olympic victors is Eutelidas, who in Ol. 
38 won the boys’ Pentathlon and wrestling.*t I need say no more of this 
theory, which is open to nearly all the objections urged against the two 
preceding theories, 


4,.—Examination of the Evidence for the Triple Victory. 


The three theories which have been last discussed rest upon two 
assumptions: the first is that with several competitors competing against 
one another, it would be unusual for any individual to win three events; 
the second is that the literary evidence implies the necessity of a triple 
victory. 

In considering the first point we must remember that the Pentathlete 
was not a specialist in any one form of exercise. Thus Plato in a passage, 
which I shall have to consider again, says that the Pentathlete is inferior to 
the runner and the wrestler in their own special events, but superior in them 
to all other athletes.*2 The wrestler would be too heavy, the runner not 
sufficiently developed in the upper part of his body.** Therefore as a rule 
those who hoped for prizes in these events would train specially for them 
and not for the Pentathlon, the entries for which would be confined to the 
all-round athletes who combined strength and speed.** With such a class of 


80 Faber, Zum Fiinfkampf ἃ, Hell., Philologus 

L. (1891), Faber gives good reasons for believ- 

ing that the number of competitors would 
seldom exceed twelve. There is some evidence 

for a small number in wrestling and boxing 
competitions; cf. Lucian, Hermot. 40. Dr. 
Haggenmiiller (op. cit.) also criticizes this 

theory at length, but his own theory is perhaps 
} still more improbable. He supposes that the 
first four events were merely test events, in 
which a certain standard only was required. 
All who had passed these tests were left in for 
the wrestling which practically decided the 
prize. Apart from the undue importance 
which this theory assigns to wrestling, it is 
_ surely ridiculous to degrade into test exercises 
those events which were peculiar to the Pent- 


oa very weak testimony, fo for Prof. Mahaffy 
how i "Sea aay καρ κα 


of the early Olympic Register, J.H.S. vol. ii. 
Krause, op. cit. p. 782, mentions a Borotian 
Acastides, who is named in an inscription as 
winning both events at Athens. 

82 Plato, Amat. p. 135, D, E. 

33 Xenophon, Symposiwm, ii. 17. 

34 Instances of Pentathletes winning other 
competitions are remarkably rare. Eutelidas 
and Acastides as I have mentioned won vic- 
tories in wrestling, Phayllus and Xenophon in 
the Stadium race (Xenophon’s double victory in 
one day was a record, Pind. Ol. xii. 31). Several 
Pentathletes won in the δίαυλος, or in the 
armed race, Gorgos of Elis (Paus. vi. 15, 9), 
Eraton, Οἱ. 135, Kranaos Ol. 231 (Krause, 
Olympia. 280, 812). Such double victories 
would naturally be more frequent in the more 
local games. At Athens, Bion and Timocles 
won the Stadium, and Callias the armed race as 
well the Pentathlon, 0.7. 4. ii. 2, 966, 968. 


62 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


competitors a slight physical superiority would make one or two men 
superior to all the rest not in one single event but in several, especially if, as 
I shall try to show, most of the events required much the same qualities and 
physique. For the exercises were not as varied as they seem. Most writers 
have assumed that running and jumping would be won by the same man. It 
is perfectly true that pace is a most important factor in a running long jump. 
But these same writers usually maintain—on somewhat scanty evidence 
possibly—that the Greek long jump was astanding jump. However, whether 
the Greeks took a run or not, it is certain that they used jumping weights ; 
and with weights only a short run, or rather a run of a few steps, is possible, 
and their effective use requires strength in the arms and shoulders, which 
parts they are most useful in developing. In fact the swing of the weights 
is very similar to the swing of the diskos,** and a good long jump, as a good 
throw, must have required a harmonious, well timed effort of every part of 
the body, the upper part as well as the lower. The general development 
and complete control of the muscles necessary for these events would give an 
equal superiority in wrestling, especially with men of the same weight, for the 
heavy-weight wrestler would be excluded by the very conditions of the com- 
petition; to a less extent they would tell in the race, especially if the race 
came fourth, ὁ.6. late in the competition, for the sprinter proper would not enter 
for the Pentathlon. Therefore I believe that the five events would commonly 
be divided between two or at the most three competitors.®® The scanty evidence 
which we have of the details of actual competitions agrees with this view. 
Phayllus must have won the jump, the diskos, and the race, for he also won 
the stadium race at Delphi. Hieronymus * won the diskos, spear, and 
wrestling. Automedes of Phlius*’ apparently won.the same three events. 
Diophon, the subject of Simonides’ epigram, possibly won all five. The only 
evidence against this view is the mythical Pentathlon of Peleus. But this 
contest was mythical, five heroes took part in it, and proper respect to the 
heroes demanded that the honours should be divided, each winning one event. 
Further, I am only stating what I believe would generally happen, not 
what would always happen.*® 

I have endeavoured to show that a triple victory was probable. The 
- next question is whether the literary evidence proves it to be necessary. 
This evidence consists in certain references to a triple victory and in the use 


ὅδ Cf. the attitudes of discoboloi and jumpers 
in vase-paintings; cf. Jiithner, Antike Turn- 
gerdthe, p. 14. 

36 So Faber, op. cit. ‘So konnte es meines 
Erachtens sehr wohl éfters vorkommen dass 
einer in drei Uebungen der erste war.’ I had 
worked out my views on this question before 
reading Dr. Faber’s article, and though I am 
not indebted to him for my arguments, I have 
carefully noted those points where our argu- 
ments coincide, because on practical questions 
two independent witnesses are better than one. 


87 Hdt., ix. 33. 

38 Bacchylides, ix. J.c. 

39 It is difficult to find a modern analogy. In 
a championship meeting all the competitors 
have specialised for one event. Perhaps the 
nearest analogy is offered by the sports of a large 
Public school. Schoolboys do not specialise in 
athletics and the chief events are usually 
divided between two or three boys. But of course 
such a competition is too limited fora true com- 
parison. ; 


alte ον. σ: 
THE METHOD OF DECIDING THE PENTATHLON. 63 


of a number of cognate words τριάξειν, τριαγμός, τριακτήρ, ἀτρίακτος, ἀπο- 
τριάξειν, τρισσεύειν. It will be convenient to classify the passages referred to 
according to date as follows: © 


1. Passages from early classical writers — 
(a) Aesch. Choeph. 338 : 
οὐκ ἀτρίακτος ἄτα ; 
(Ὁ) Aesch. Agam. 171: 
ὶ τριακτῆρος οἴχεται τυχών. 
(6) Aesch. Lumen. ὅ89 : 
ὃν μὲν τόδ᾽ ἤδη τῶν τριῶν παλαισμάτων. 
(d) Eur. Or, 484: 
διὰ τριῶν ἀπόλλυμαι. 

(6) Plato, Phaedr. 256 B: 

TOV τριῶν παλαισμάτων τῶν ὡς ἀληθῶς Ὀλυμπιακῶν ev νενικήσασιν. 

(f) Plato, Huthydem. 277 Ο : 

ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὸ τρίτον καταβαλὼν ὥσπερ πάλαισμα. 

(g) Epigram on Milo Anthol. Pal. xi. 316: 

οὐχὶ τρι’ ἐστίν" ν κεῖμαι, λοιπόν τ᾽ ἄλλα μέ τις βαλέτω. 

(h) Epigram on Cleitomachus, Anthol. Pal. ix. ὅ88 : 

τὸ τρίτον οὐκ ἐκόνισσεν ἐπωμίδας, ἀλλὰ παλαίσας 
ἀπτὼς τοὺς τρισσοὺς ἼἼσθμοθεν εἷλε πόνους. 

With regard to these we may observe that ὁ, 6, 7, g, obviously refer to 
three falls in wrestling ; a, 6, d, might quite well refer to the same, the 
epigram on Cleitomachus refers to a triple victory in Wrestling, Boxing, and 
Pankration, and perhaps αἰβὸ to three falls. Further the word τριακτήρ had 

: by the time of Aeschylus become proverbial for a victor. 


2. Passages from late writers, scholiasts, and lexicographers— 

(a) Schol. to Aesch. Agam. 171: 

τριακτῆρος" νικητοῦ ἐκ μεταφορᾶς τῶν ἐν τοῖς πεντάθλοις ἀποτριαζόν- 
᾿ τῶν ἐπ᾽ ἐλπίδι νίκης. 

() Schol. to Aristides, Pan. Frommel p. 112: 

οὐχ ὅτι πάντως οἱ πένταθλοι πάντα νικῶσιν" ἀρκεῖ γὰρ αὐτοῖς Ὗ τῶν 

έ πρὸς νίκην. 

(ὁ) Plut. Symp. ix. 2: 

διὸ τοῖς τρισὶν ὥσπερ of πένταθλοι περίεστι καὶ νικᾷ. 

(4) Suidas : 

ΩΝ λέγουσιν οἱ παλαιστρικοὶ ἀντὶ τοῦ τρὶς πεσεῖν, ἢ τροχάσ- 
ra νικηθῆναι cas δίαυλον, δόλιχον. 


θ4 Ἔν NORMAN GARDINER 


upon facts, are a very insecure basis on which to build a theory. The state- 
ments of the student pure and simple on athletics’ are liable to be as in- 
accurate “0. as those of the lady novelist in the days before ladies became 
athletic. Only recently in a work of great learning there appeared, d propos 
of the starting lines at Olympia, the astounding statement that they were 
doubtless intended to give a good grip for the feet of the runners who 
planted a heel on each line! If such a statement can issue from one of our great 


Universities in this age of athleticism, one may be pardoned for viewing with 


scepticism the remarks of an unknown scholiast, especially when it is uni- 
versally acknowledged that some of the scholiasts have made mistakes as to 
the five events which constituted the Pentathlon.4* Let me briefly consider 
these five passages. I have already pointed out the fallacy of arguing 
from so metaphorical a passage as that in Plutarch’s Symposium. It merely 
confirms the statement of the scholiast to Aristides that three victories were 
sufficient. But this scholiast and the scholiast to the Agamemnon are con- 
tradictory. For if three victories were sufficient, how could the pentathlete 
be said to win a triple victory (ἀποτριάζειν) ‘in hope of victory’? I can only 
suggest that the last words are a mistake on the part of the scholiast, who 
knew that ἀποτριάξειν was used of a victory in the Pentathlon but, under the 
false impression that five victories were necessary, added these words to 
correct his former statement.” 

Again, it does not follow because three victories were sufficient that three 
were necessary. For instance, a writer on the University Sports might 
naturally say that it was sufficient to win five out of the nine events.#® But 
in 1897 Oxford won by four to three, there being two dead heats.“4 One can 
imagine what arguments might arise among archaeologists of some future 
millennium over such a record. Similarly in the Pentathlon if A won two 
events, B, C, D, one each, A would surely be the winner, but it would not 
cease to be true that victory in three events was sufficient. 

With regard to the passage in Suidas it has been stated that Suidas is 
guilty of a mistake in applying the words to a triple victory in the race. 
Why should this be so? The word τριάζειν simply means to treble, and 
applied to sports can be used of any triple victory, of three falls in wrestling, 
of victory in three races, of victory in three Olympiads, of a triple victory in 


Boxing, Wrestling, and Pankration.° Such triple victors were especially 


was added. 
44 Were dead heats unknown in the Pentath- 


40 cf. Faber, op. cit. p. 490. 


“| cf. Marquardt, op. cit. p.5. Faber, op. cit, 


p. 469. 

42 This is surely simpler than Faber’s explana- 
tion ‘ Infolge einer Vergleichung mit denjenigen 
unter den Fiinfkimpfern, welche in der Hoff- 
* nung auf der Sieg nur in drei Stiicken zu siegen 
suchen (d. ἢ, sich nur in diesen iiben).’ One 
would expect the metaphor to be derived from 
those who were manifestly victors, not from 
those who hoped to be. 

43 I refer to the time before the tenth event 


lon? It would be strange if they were. Homer’s 
account of the chariot race certainly suggests 
the possibility and so does Virgil in the foot- 
race ; 
Transeat elapsus prior, ambiguumve relinquat. 
οἵ, Herodotus v. 22. ἀγωνιζόμενος στάδιον 
συνεξέπιπτε τῷ πρώτῳ. 

45 cf. Philostr. Gymn. 88 Leonidas in four 
Olympiads ἐνίκα τὴν τριττὺν ταύτην. Cf. Faber, 
op. cit. p. 490. 


. 


ee ee ae 


eo ene” 


‘THE METHOD OF DECIDING THE PENTATHLON. οὗ 


honoured by the privilege of having their own portraits instead of merely 
typical statues set up at Olympia. Naturally then the word τριακτήρ would 
become equivalent to a decisive victor, © 

Finally Pollux simply tells us that ἀποτριάξαι was the term used of 
victory in the Pentathlon. As [ have shewn, the term had become proverbial 
_ for victory as early as the time of Aeschylus, the original metaphor being 

probably taken from wrestling ; for the separate events were older than the 
Pentathlon, and wrestling was always a favourite exercise of the Greeks, 
The word was, moreover, used of any triple victory and so was naturally 
applied to the Pentathlon, where three victories made victory in the whole 
secure, Sometimes there may have been only two competitors; in the 
Palaestra and Gymnasium private matches, we may be sure, were frequent, 
and in such a match the winner must have won three events. I have tried 
to show that in any case he would probably do so. If this is true, the term 
ἀποτριάζειν might well be extended inaccurately to the rarer cases where the 
winner won less than three events.“° Possibly there was another reason 
which made the term particularly appropriate to the Pentathlon. It is 
probable that the three events peculiar to the Pentathlon were known as ‘ the 
triad, #7 and some have suggested that: only victors in one of these three 
were allowed to proceed to the final wrestling. At all events in the short- 
hand which the vase painters use to represent the Pentathlon, these three 
contests are almost universally employed to represent the whole.** 

I conclude therefore that there is nothing in the literary evidence to 
prove that three victories were necessary, and with this assumption disappears 
the necessity for the elaborate schemes which I have examined. Three 
victories were sufficient to make final victory certain, the most famous pent- 
athletes undoubtedly won three victories, but this did not exclude the 
possibility of winning with two, or even one first. 


5.—Dr. Holwerda’s Theory.” 


The chief difference between Dr. Holwerda’s view, and the one which I 
am going to propose, is his contention that only those who were successful in 
one or more of the first four contests were allowed to proceed to the wrestling. 
Were such a view tenable, it would be better to make the first three com- 
petitions qualifying, and so make the theory harmonise with the τριαγμός of 
events peculiar to the Pentathlon. But there are serious objections. In the 
first place, Dr. Holwerda attaches too much importance to wrestling, in case 


46 of, Faber, op. cit. p. 491. the Pentathlon. 
“ This I take to be the meaning of Philo- 48 οἵ, P, Gardner, J.H.S, i. p. 215. In 
stratus, Gymn. 11, The Pentathlete in train- the British Museum vases B 134, 576, E 
he says, γυμνάζεταί τι τῶν τριῶν. Faber, 58 (repeated on each side of cylix) E 96. 164 
in ye opinion, explains these"words (halteres on the ground). ef, Gerhard A, V. 
in in which each Pentathlete 39. 259, 294. Annal. Inst, 1846 M. 
4 Holwerda, Arch. Zeit. 1881, pp. 206, seq. 


66 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


of a tie practically making it count double. In the second place, the victory 
of Peleus‘in Philostratus ὃ would have been impossible, for Peleus having 
been only second in the first four events would never have reached the stage 
of wrestling. Therefore we must either place the wresting earlier, which is 
absurd in practice and contrary to the evidence, or we must disregard the 
statement of Philostratus, who as a protensos writer on gymnastics surely 
carries weight as an authority. 

It will be convenient here briefly to consider this passage. ‘ Before ἐμ 
time of Jason,’ says Philostratus, ‘there were separate crowns for the jump, 
the diskos, and the spear. At the time of the Argo’s voyage Telamon was 
best at throwing the diskos, Lynceus the spear, the sons of Boreas were. best 
at running and jumping, and Peleus “ταῦτα μὲν ἣν δεύτερος, ἐκράτει δὲ 
ἁπάντων πάλῃ. ὁπότ᾽ οὖν ἠγωνίζοντο ἐν Λήμνῳ, φασὶν Ἰάσονα Ἰ]ηλεῖ 
χαριζόμενον συνάψαι τὰ πέντε καὶ Ἰ]ηλέα τὴν νίκην οὕτω συλλέξασθαι. 

Dr. Holwerda maintains that δεύτερος means not ‘second best’ but 
‘defeated.’ But that δεύτερος can mean second in a competition, is clear from 
the words which Thucydides puts into the mouth of Alcibiades™: “ἅρματα 
μὲν ἑπτὰ καθῆκα, ἐνίκησα δὲ, καὶ δεύτερος καὶ τέταρτος Frevdume “And if 
δεύτερος does not mean second best, why does Philostratus use the particles 
οὖν and ottw? Why does it follow that when the five events were put 
together, Peleus was victor in the whole? Only two explanations are 
possible : either wrestling counted more than other events, a view which I 
have tried to prove is contrary to the whole spirit of the Pentathlon, or in 
case of a tie at all events marks must have been assigned for second place. 
This then is the obvious principle to be deduced from this passage. 


6.—Martin Faber’s Theory. 


Another theory is put forward by Martin Faber in Vol. L. of the 
Philologus (1891).*? In this article Dr. Faber shows a practical knowledge of 
athletics and athletic meetings far in advance of previous German writers 
on the subject. His conclusions and many of his arguments are very similar 
to those which I had myself arrived at independently before I read his 
article, but unfortunately he spoils his argument by endeavouring to establish 
an artificial distinction between two classes of Pentathlete. The most com- 
mon and also the most glorious form of victory, says Dr. Faber, was that of 
the τριακτήρ, who was first in three events. But the term was also’ ex- 
tended, and applied by courtesy to those who won in other ways, such as 
Peleus, who was first in wrestling and second in all the other events, or even 
to the ὕπακρος, who owed his victory to being second in all five events. 
The existence of this ὕπακρὸς is the key to Dr. Faber’s argument. But his 
existence as an independent being is I fear very shadowy: it depends upon 


_™ Phil. Gymn. eh Bay pp. 469 seq. 
δι Thue. vi. 16, 2. 


——— σοι 


ae a ὦἃς 


᾿ 


‘THE METHOD OF DECIDING THE PENTATHLON,. 67 


three passages, firstly, a passage from a Heidelberg manuscript of uncertain date, 
‘secondly, a passage from Longinus, and thirdly, a passage from the Pseudo- 
Platonic dialogue, Amatores, to which I have already referred.’ In discussing 
this evidence I prefer to reverse Dr. Faber’s order and to deal with the last 
passage first, as being the oldest and most important of the three. Socrates™ 
is criticising the idea of the philosopher who is ἔμπειρος πασῶν τῶν τεχνῶν, 
and who without possessing the technical skill or knowledge of the craftsman 
has sufficient general knowledge of all crafts to enable him to form an 
intelligent judgment on any technical point which may arise. And he com- 
‘pares such an one to the Pentathlete who is inferior to the wrestler and 
runner κατὰ τὰ τούτων Oda, but yet in these same exercises excels all 
other athletes. Just so the effect of philosophy on those who study it—rav 
μὲν πρώτων eis ξύνεσιν περὶ τὰς τέχνας ἐλλείπεσθαι, τὰ δευτερεῖα δ᾽ ἔχοντας 
τῶν ἄλλων περιεῖναι καὶ οὕτως γίγνεσθαι περὶ πάντα ὕπακρόν τινα ἄνδρα 
τὸν πεφιλοσοφηκότα. From the addition of τινα to ὕπακρον and from the 
fact that ὕπακρος is in another passage used by itself as a substantive, or 
coupled with πένταθλος, Dr. Faber concludes that the word is a term for 
.a sort of Pentathlete, and he further adds that it is a term for α sort of victor 
in the Pentathlon, because in the. following paragraph the philosopher is 
described as not such an one ὥστε διὰ τὴν τοῦ ἑνὸς τούτου ἐπιμέλειαν τῶν 
ἄλλων ἁπάντων ἀπολελεῖφθαι ὥσπερ οἱ δημιουργοὶ ἀλλὰ παντῶν μετρίως 
ἐφῆφθαι. ἀπολελεῖφθαι, says Dr. Faber, is the technical word for being left 
behind in a race: therefore ὕπακρος denotes a particular sort of victor, one 
who gained the prize because he was second in all events, περὶ πάντα 
ὕπακρον. It would be hard to find a better instance of the danger of 
arguing from a metaphor. Reference to a lexicon would convince any one 
who.did not know it before that ἀπολελεῖφθαι τῶν ἄλλων ἁπαντῶν is used 
in its ordinary sense ‘to be found wanting in everything else.’ If ἀπολελεῖ- 
φθαι is used in a technical sense, why not ἐφῆφθαι But apart from such 
minor points this view of the meaning of ὕπακρος is contrary to the whole 
argument of the dialogue. There is no comparison between one philosopher 
and another, but between the philosopher as a class and the craftsman as a 
class. Likewise there is no comparison between one Pentathlete and anotiver, 
but between the Pentathlete as a class and the specialised athlete. And the 
word ὕπακρος in either case connotes that quality which distinguishes the 
philosopher and the Pentathlete from the craftsman or professional. It 
connotes the general excellence of the all round man who though not 
absolutely first-rate in any particular department, is nearly first-rate in all. 
Such a man is the object of admiration to the many, but of contempt to the 
specialist, and so the word ὕπακρος fluctuates between the idea of praise and 
blame. In the Amatores the idea of blame ‘is perhaps predominant, in the 
δέν. from, eee which I next proceed to discuss, the idea of praise 


oe » 
᾿ 1 — 


τὰ " Plato, Amat. 135 C—136 ©, 138 E. τι ἐπιτηδέυοντος, Aristides Life of Pythagoras, 
δι κα niece πάσα: ἔχων τὰς δυνά. Bekker 440. 
ις τῶν ἀθλημάτα Δ Αρλβς Srv favo? & 


68 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


prevails. Longinus,® in comparing Demosthenes and Hyperides, says: " εἰ δ᾽ 
ἀριθμῷ, μὴ τῷ μεγέθει κρίνοιτο τὰ κατορθώματα, οὕτως ἂν καὶ Ὑπερίδης τῷ 
παντὶ προέχοι Δημοσθένους. ἔστι γὰρ αὐτοῦ πολυφωνότερος καὶ πλείους 
ἀρετὰς ἔχων καὶ σχεδὸν ὕ ὕπακρος ἐν πᾶσιν, ὡς ὁ πένταθλος, ὥστε τῶν μὲν 


πρωτείων [ἐν ἅπασι] τῶν ἄλλων ἀγωνιστῶν λείπεσθαι, πρωτεύειν δὲ τῶν 


ἰδιωτῶν. In this passage, which is an obvious reminiscence of Plato, there 
is again no trace of any distinction between the ὕπακρος and other Pent- 
athletes. On the contrary the somewhat unusual expression ὕπακρος 
qualified by the apologetic σχεδόν, as in Plato by τις, is explained by the 
words ‘like the Pentathlete’; and the concluding words show that the 
Pentathlete as being ὕπακρος is contrasted on the one hand with other 
professional athletes, on the other hand with private persons, I conclude, 
therefore, that there is no evidence in either of these passages to prove that 
the term Uzraxpos denoted a special sort of Pentathlete, or a special sort of victor 
in the Pentathlon, but that rather it connoted the essential quality of the 
Pentathlete as a class, a ΠΌΒΗΙΣ 80 essential that it could be used as a 
synonym for πένταθλος. 

The origin of Dr. Faber’s distinction is to be found in his third passage. 
In a Heidelberg manuscript (Cod. Palat.-Gr. 129, Fol. 37, v. 15-18) is found 
the following remarkable passage : 

πέντε Tap ἔἄλλησιν ἄθλοι' πυγμὴ πάλη δρόμος ἀκόντιον καὶ δίσκος. . . 
ὅ γε μὲν νικήσας κατὰ τοὺς πέντε ἀνωτέρω ῥηθέντας ἄθλους πένταθλος 
ἐκαλεῖτο" ὁ “δὲ μὴ τοὺς ἐν ἑκάστῳ περιβοήτους δυνηθεὶς νικῆσαι ἀλλὰ τοὺς 
δευτερεύοντας ὠνομάξετο πένταθλος μέν, ὕπακρος δέ. 

Dr. Faber gives no information as to the probable date of this extract, 
and seems himself not altogether free from suspicions as to its value as 
evidence, suspicions which are surely well founded. In the first place, the 
writer commits the serious mistake of omitting the jump, which was by 
general consent the most characteristic feature of the πένταθλον, and sub- 
stituting boxing. The next sentence surely.implies the old belief, based 
perhaps on the couplet of Simonides, that five victories were necessary 
The last sentence seems to me a hopelessly confused reminiscence of the 
Platonic τῶν μὲν πρώτων ἐλλείπεσθαι τὰ δευτερεῖα δ᾽ ἔχοντας τῶν ἄλλων 
περιεῖναι, καὶ οὕτως γίγνεσθαι περὶ πάντα ὕπακρον, etc,’ 

If the theory could be proved from Plato and Longinus, this passage 
might afford some slight confirmation : but it surely is too slight a basis on 
which to build a theory which is unnecessary for the explanation of the 
other passages, if not actually unsuitable to them. Finally, from a practical 
point of view, the ὕπακρος ἐν πᾶσιν would be a far rarer phenomenon than 
the pentathlete who won all five events. The ὕπακρος could only win, 
if no one else won three events: therefore for him to win, the victories in 
the separate events must have been divided among at least three competitors, 
and it is almost incredible that not one of the three should have secured 


= 


°° Longinus, Jahn, p. 55, Toupius ch. 34. γ. 310 rightly explains the passage. 
The latter reads ὅς ye λείπεται and in-his note 


_—_ ee 


THE METHOD OF DECIDING THE PENTATHLON. 69. 


second place in some event, and that a fourth competitor should have 
obtained all five seconds. 
7.—Conclusion 


_ IT have tried to show the serivus objections to all the artificial schemes 
which have been suggested for the Pentathlon. I have tried to show that 
there is no evidence for the assumption that five or even three victories were 
_hecessary, nor for the assumption that one or more exercises were used as 

qualifying tests, least of all for the assumption that wrestling was the 
most important of the five events. Putting aside all these artificial ideas, 
we are left with two principles on which to go and I believe they are 
sufficient to explain all cases that could occur. The first is that victory in 
three events in any case secured victory in the whole; the second is that in case 
of a tie account was taken of second or third places. The first principle 
depends on the evidence for the τριαγμός, the second on the Pentathlon of 
Peleus. Let us see how these principles will work out. 

With the order of events I am not immediately concerned. The only 
certain fact is that wrestling must have been last. Otherwise I doubt 
whether it is of any use to try to settle the order. The evidence at present 
is quite inadequate, and it is not even certain that the order was fixed. In 
the thousand years or more of the Olympic games, many changes must have 
occurred,*® and we know from Pausanias that competitions were from time 
to time introduced or omitted, and that the Hellanodikae could at their 
discretion alter the order of other events. There were many athletic meetings 
in Greece, and it would be as absurd to expect absolute uniformity in the 
details of Greek as of our own athletics. 

The competitions in Jumping, throwing the Diskos and the Spear,°” 
would naturally be conducted as in the present day, all competing against 
all. The race might be run in heats or not, as the numbers required ; but I 
may point out that the starting arrangements at Olympia could accommodate 
twenty for a stadium race; it is highly improbable that there were ever so 

‘many entries, and the evidence for heats is at present very defective, indeed 
for the Pentathlon it is non-existent. Wrestling must of course have been 
_ decided on the tournament principle. 

If there were only two competitors, one of them must have won three 
events. Suppose there were more, at least five A, B, C, D, E: for there 
cannot have been more than five winners in five events, and therefore what 
holds good of five will hold of any smaller or larger number. There are 
only four possible cases, which I state in what I believe to be the order of 
probability, applying to them the two principles I have laid down, 

1. A3, B2 
or B1,C1 


A wins | by the first principle. 


mz ote Hause, Jahrbuch Arch. Inst,, 1895, οἱ for distance, is very doubtful. Faber brings 
3. mn. forward very strong arguments in favour of a 
ar was thrown at mark distance throw. cf. Jiithner, op. cit. pp. 54, seq. 


THE METHOD OF DECIDING THE PENTATHLON. 
2. A 23,82. 01. ΠΡῸΣ Set “ΔΝ σι, 
The victory oad oad on ihe ak of the fifth seul whieh Cx | 

If the fifth event were the wrestling, it would be reasonable to suppose that 

A and B having won two events each, other competitors would drop out, ἐς ἢ 

these two would be left to fight it out. If C had won an earlier event, the per- — 


formances of A and B in that event, or perhaps in all the events in which they ΤᾺ A 
were not first, would decide the issue in accordance with our second principle, ᾿ 


ὃ. ΑἸ ot, 01, 91: 


. A would naturally win by the first ἜΣ but it cual: be οὐξωδα 
that such a case was decided by marks, 1.6. by the second principle. 


AAA BP CAD 1 i oS aa 
In this highly improbable case, the victor y must have been decided by | \ ay 
athe as in the Pentathlon of Peleus, ‘ 


In this scheme the only doubtful case is the third, and there is as faras) μ᾿ 
I know no evidence upon which to decide it definitely. Other complications 
may have been introduced by dead heats; all such cases, would no doubt 
have been settled in accordance with the same common sense principles. The 
above scheme is in entire agreement with modern athletic experience and, 
with the doubtful exception of the words ἐπ᾿ ἐλπίδι νίκης in the scholiast 
to the Agamemnon, there is I believe no passage in any ancient author that 
contradicts its ; 


E. NoRMAN GARDINER. ᾿ 


΄ 


ee Stab we aby oul) dy uae pone Ye 


7 
‘ “ ‘ar / rhe τὰς. Ἣν 
“F Po 2 yh? fit δὲ κῶν ᾿ ΡΣ 


᾿ ‘ ᾿ ων» ill Dé ἣ 
᾿ , Φ " 5 Ἷ ¥ = 
4 ὶ > - - ν - 


MR. HEADLAM’S THEORY OF GREEK LYRIC MTREE. 


From A MusrciAn’s Porint oF VIEW. 


GREEK music is the one branch of Greek art which makes no emotional 
appeal to us at the present day. The specimens which have come down to 
: us are few in number, and with one exception belong to the post-classical 
period ; yet these should be sufficient in quantity for us to form a judgment 
upon them. There are technical treatises, and the literature of the subject 
is by no means:small. But the fact remains, that though musicians may 
have some idea of the position of Greek music in the historical development 
of musical technique, they are utterly unable to assign any aesthetic value 
to it. Mediaeval music, if it does not stir us profoundly, is to us at least as 
intelligible as the painting and sculpture of the same period. But to compare 
the sculptures of the Parthenon with what we know of Greek music seems 
ridiculous. 

_ The celebrated Delphic Hymn which was the subject of 80. much 
excitement a few years ago, and which certainly did not suffer from lack 
of performance or discussion, has lapsed into obscurity, except for those who 
are specialists in the subject. It was simply an archaeological curiosity, and 
made no genuine appeal to modern emotions. The one fragment of Euripides 
quoted and described by Dr. Monro (The Modes of Ancient Greek Music, 
Oxford, 1894) is even more unintelligible! And yet we know that to the 
Greeks music was as important as it is to us—more so indeed, since they 
attached to it an ethical significance which few people would think of 
attaching to the art now. 

_ Mr. Headlam’s theory, however, if it does not make these fragments 
more musical to our ears, at least shows that the Greeks had a feeling for 
certain aspects of music quite as subtle as that of nineteenth-century 
musicians. | Yet before discussing this in detail, it will be well to consider 
a little more carefully what the Greek attitude was to music in general. 
[κ᾿ Mig music ἢ is a thing by itself: the highest forms of music, we are apt to 


‘ tis7_8") ἘΦ ate 
nothing of the sevkved Tireck. those to whom it appeals most strongly feel it 
mp egg oe only as a decorative background, not, as in a 
‘ ΕΣ ern Says δον Rott ee a emotional 
ul eee Se: en 


72 ss EDWARD 5. DENT 


say, require no words to explain them. We divide the art into two branches, 
vocal and instrumental ; and it is hardly an exaggeration to say that a large 
number of musicians regard the latter as the more important of the two. 
But with the Greeks the case was very different. ‘Greek music, says 
Dr. Monro, ‘ was primarily and chiefly vocal. Instrumental music was looked 
upon as essentially subordinate—an accompaniment, or at best an imitation, 
of singing. For in the view of the Greeks the words were an integral part 
of the whole composition... The modern practice of basing a musical 
composition—a long and elaborate chorus, for example—upon a few words, 
wk‘ch are repeated again and again as the music is developed, would have 
been impossible in Greece. It becomes natural when the words are not an 
integral part of the work, but only serve to announce the idea on which it is 
based, and which the music brings owt under successive aspects. The same 
may be said of the use of a melody with many different sets of words— 
Greek writers regard even the repetition of the melody in a strophe and- 
antistrophe as a concession to the’ comparative weakness of the chorus,’ 
And again: ‘Several indications combine to make it probable that singing 
and speaking were not so widely separated from each other in Greek as in 
the modern languages with which we are most familiar... Our habit of 
using Latin translations of the terms of Greek grammar has tended to 
obscure the fact that they belong in almost every case to the ordinary 
vocabulary -of music... Consequently every Greek word (enclitics being 
reckoned as parts of a word) is a sort of musical phrase, and every sentence 
is a more or less definite melody.’ Thus the Greek orator and actor, accord- 
ing to Dr. Monro, who were definitely speakers, and not singers, according to 
Greek notions, habitually declaimed their speeches in what we should call 
recitative, and indeed recitative hardly less elaborate than that of J. S. Bach’s 
oratorios. What, then, was the difference between the ordinary dialogue of 
a classical tragedy and the choral portions which were definitely set to music ? 
The melodic system was no doubt more elaborate, but that does not count 
for very much, and we know that the Greeks had no harmony as we under- 
stand the term. The principal difference must have beenthe presence in the 
choruses of musical form, And however little listeners may be consciously aware 
of it, form, in the widest sense of the term, is perhaps the most important 
factor in all music worthy of the name. Form in music corresponds to 
composition in painting, to symmetry or balance in architecture. It is the 
one thing that makes music logical and intelligible. We find it in the music | 
of the savage, who repeats one phrase until he is tired of it, then does the 
same with another, and finally goes back to the first, combining the pleasures 
of contrast and recognition. It has been the guiding spirit cf civilized music 
from the times of the early Christian hymns: the vague meanderings of the 
early seventeenth century reactionaries were only saved from utter confusion 
by its presence ; it tyrannized over the eighteenth century, and in the nine- 
teenth reached its highest stage of subtle elaboration. 

But musical form is a thing which we do not usually expect to find in 
modern poetry. Modern poets are as often as not quite unmusical, and 


MR. -HEADLAM’S THEORY OF GREEK LYRIC METRE. 73. 


those who have had some technical knowledge of music do not seem to have 
applied its principles to any remarkable extent in their poetry. The greatest 
difficulty of modern composers has been to reconcile the different structural 
principles of poetry and music. The cighteenth century generally cut the 
knot by ignoring the poets’ forms as much as possible: in recent times 
reaction has led to composers sacrificing their own interests in order to be 
rhetorical, the results of which sometimes please neither the public nor 
the poets. 
But in the classical age, when poets were their own composers, and the 
two functions were so closely united that no one would think of saying of a 
dramatist that he was ‘a good poet but a poor musician,’ or vice versd ; when, 
consequently, music and poetry had not had time to develop separately on 
diverging principles; then, surely, we might reasonably expect, from a nation 
with the high artistic abilities of Greece, masterpieces of poetry or music— 
call it which you will, since the two were one individual art—that might 
fitly compare with those that were produced in the realms of sculpture and 
architecture. And Mr. Headlam has now shown that such masterpieces 
were actually produced. 
He points out that to a Greek each of the ἈΡΈΚ αν lyric metres connoted 
more or less definite ideas; ¢.g. the trochaic was didactic, the glyconic asso- 
ciated with love or marriage. And further, that transition from one metre 
~ [ο another was managed in a very subtle and ingenious way, to which we 
find some sort of parallel in modern music. It is not counterpoint, though 
Mr. Headlam is really logical in calling it so; that is, it is not what a modern 
musician associates with the word. Counterpoint is defined as the combina- 
tion of melodies, and Mr. Headlam is certainly justified in considering his 
rhythms as melodies, and in showing that contrasting specimens are com- 
bined. But to us counterpoint implies two or more voices singing different 
melodies simultaneously, whereas in the Greek lines quoted there is only one 
voice singing. Mr. Headlam’s own musical example explains his meaning to 
a musician better than his words. The device would be better described as 
‘overlapping of rhythms.’ The two other methods, dink of one syllable, and 
echo, i.e. the repetition of a figure to lead from one phrase to the next, are 
common in modern music: the overlapping in Mr. Headlam’s way less so, 
since the effect is better and more easily obtained by polyphony, of which 
the Greeks knew nothing. The best examples of these devices are to be 
found in Mendelssohn’s Songs without Words; the first of Book V. is a good 
specimen for the purpose. Not that Mendelssohn occupies in modern music 
a position analogous to that of Aeschylus in Greek tragedy ; but the absence 
of polyphony in the Songs without Words makes it easy for the inexperienced 
reader to pick out the structural devices which abound in them. 
' The extract from the Agamemnon is particularly instructive. I am 
sorry that it is useless to refer the reader to Sir Hubert Parry’s music 
_ composed for the performance at Cambridge in 1900; noble and dramatic 
as it i is, it does not illustrate Mr. Headlam’s theory. But Mr. Headlam’s 
analysis οἵ. the passage makes its musical structure intelligible without 


an i. , i 
παν δ μὰ we yale 


74 MR. HEADLAM’S THEORY OF GREEK LYRIC METRE. 


notes. Lines 1-3 are trochaic ‘for the expression of stern moral and 
religious views. Lines 4-6 are Anacreontic, describing ‘the sumptuous 


delicate luxurious Helen flying eastward with her Asiatic lover, reaching a 


climax at the glyconic lines 6-7, a rhythm associated with wedding-songs. 
This is only momentary ; we return to the Anacreontic metre (lines 8-12), 
leading back to glyconic again (13-15) as the pursuers are described. The 
antistrophe is modelled on the same lines, not only for rhythm but for 
subject-matter as well. ‘Surely this is very beautiful, says Mr. Headlam. 
Surely indeed ; it is the same sort of structure as we find in the exposition 
of the first movement of a Beethoven sonata. We may call the trochaics 
the first subject : the anacreontics will represent the transition to the second 
subject, which first attracts our attention with the conspicuous contrasting 
rhythm of the glyconic, then develops itself in anacreontics again, ending 
with a codetta based on its principal figure. We should naturally expect 
this to be followed by a contrasting section (of about the same length, 
roughly speaking) in which the subjects previously announced are ‘de- 
veloped,’ ze. presented in various aspects, always with a sense of growth 
towards a climax; then would follow the recapitulation of the first section, 
ending with a coda. This chorus however is in a more extended form: it 
might be compared with some of Schumann’s experiments in construction. 
But the fairly common plan of strophe, antistrophe, epode, is natural enough 
to a musician. The ‘development section’ falls out, as in many shorter 
overtures and preludes, and its place is supplied by the coda, which as a 
rule contains some development of the materials already used. The same 
thing happens, according to Mr. Headlam, in the epode. On the other hand 
the epode may be quite in contrast to what proceeds; so, in a musical 
composition, do we sometimes find the coda. Τῇ Mr. Headlam will publish 
more analyses of this kind, especially of complete poems, it seems likely that 
we may find more musical parallels to them. 
Epwarpb J, DEN’. 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM CYZICUS. 


1.—Funeral banquet stele (one sitting and four reclining figures) found 
by Mr. de Rustafell near the eastern walls; height 0°61, breadth 0°74, height 
of letters ‘01 metre. 


AHMHTPIOY ASTOYTOY ΉΝΟΔ O 
TOY MHNOAQPOY INOAQPOY OA Y 
Δημητρίου Μηνο 1Ἰδότου τοῦ M |nvod[ ὠρ]ο[υ 
τοῦ Μηνοδώρου Μηνοδώρου τοῦ Μην]οδ[ώρο]υ ? 


2—Broken funeral banquet stele found at Yeni Keui; height 0°54, 
breadth 0°46, letters Ὁ]. 


TOATIXHE PA=IOY 
THE PFOTAMQNOS TOY HPAKAEIA 
Lotixns Π]ραξίου 
τῆς ΠΠοτάμωνος τοῦ Ἣρακλείδ[ου 


3.—Broken stele with bust of man, debased style: at Yeni Keui. 
NEIKHT ... Νεικήτ[ας ? 


4.—Broken slab of rough marble, at Yeni _Keui; height 0°60, breadth 
0°46, letters of late form and irregular. 


dD ¥S A N εὐ IV Αὐρήλιος 


Αὐξάνων 


δῇ ΡΟῪ is o™ Tpovoov 
Vy N ore x P Ὰ C | _ynvos Χρησί- 


μου πιστὸς 
τ (ὅσ)τις ἂν π(ρ)οσκόψί(ε)ι «“ς» 
| C ANN TT O ὃ γά © oC ἔστ(αι) αὐτῷ πρὸς : 


τὸν θεόν. 


1 Nos. 1-4 were found by Mr. De Rustafell 8, 9, 10, 12, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 80, 
in 1901. The remainder were coliected by Mr. 31, 82,. 38, 34 are from impressions. The 
Henderson and myself while engaged on the photographs I owe to Mr. Henderson. 
survey in the summer of 1902. Nos. 1, 4, 5, 

a 


76 F. W. HASLUCK 


In ll. 3-4 we have probably a place name ending in -ηνός. 

For the spelling of ποσκόψει we may compare C./.G. 9266 (= Hamilton 
314 Sandukli). The formula ἔσται etc. also occurs at Cyzicus in C.1G. 
3690 and frequently at Eumenia in the third century Christian inscriptions 
(Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, I. (2), 498). πιστός perhaps 
hints at the religion of deceased. 


The name Αὐξάνων occurs frequently in Christian inscriptions, Ramsay 
ad loc, cit. chap. xii. nos. 389, 390, 391 (Αὐξάνουσα), 394, 401. 


5. House of Andreas at Yeni Keui. Stele of half-draped man reclining 
on couch, below which is a dog. The whole between pilasters which support 
a low arch; height 0°51, breadth 0°33, letters 0-2. 


AOKHIACEKOYNAAKAAYAIQ 

ATIOAAQNIQTQMIATPIOKAEL 

KEYACENEK TQNIAIQNMWEIAL 
ΧΆΡΙΝ 


Λοκηΐα Σεκοῦνδα Κλαυδίῳ 
᾿Απολλωνίῳ τῷ πατρὶ ὃ κατεσ- 
I > a 5 , 
κεύασεν ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων μνείας 
χάριν. 


for the spelling Aoxnia cf. C.L.G. 3662. 7 Λοκκήϊος. 


6.—Fragment in Yeni Keui on block of marble ‘35 x "8, ΥῪ 
letters Ὃ4 high. 1/ 
Y 

£ 


7.—Fragment used as doorstep in Yeni Keui 0:48x°61, height of ® 
0-17. 


θέσ[ις 
A> =) AG oer 
re \ Γ δὶ καὶ Τε[μέλλης ? 


τς 8. -ουμά by Mr Heder near the western shore: 0°65 x 0°40, 
- letters 04, 


ALAS ΔῈ δι 


ἼἽΜΗ OYAH β 
PAMOYAYPLAN( Su te 


ἘΝ 0.8 δια του 


KH N O)> TTANH Γ. it Laue Αὐρ. asic ae 


Κυζι]κηνὸς πανηγ[υριάρ- 


ΤῊΝ NE AY TOY ΓΟ κνὶ τὸν ἑαυτοῦ εἰὐερ- 


γέτην Τρό]φιμον [νεική- 


; | M O Ν σαντα πυγμὴν [ἀνδρῶν 1 τὰ 


μ]εγάλα ᾿Ασ[κληπιεῖα 


; 1 “ἢ A ITY . M4 καὶ ἀγω]νοθετήσαντα 1 


~ (or) ἐπὶ ἀγω]νοθ[ ετοῦντος τοῦ δεῖνο 
Fi 7.7 oy eee ὉΠ ππΠΠΠΠ Ὁ 
“NOC 


Faint traces of a = are visible at tle end of the second line: we may, 

perhaps, supply ΣΥΝΤΡΟΦΟΣ or, considering the relations of both persons 

| to the gymnasia, SYNEQHBOS. For τὰ μεγάλα ᾿Ασκληπιεῖα cf. Ditten- 

berger Sylloge*®, 677, 1. 8 (Cos) B.C.H. x. 410 (14) (Thyateira). Πανη- 

γυριάρχης and ἀγωνοθέτης are not found elsewhere at Cyzicus. A I. Φλ. 

Tpodipos ἄρ(χων) occurs on a coin of Severus Alexander (BM. Catal. Mysia- 

Cyzicus, No. 264), This date agrees with the lettering, but the name is very 
common, 


9.—Fragment with moulding letters ‘03, 


CIAN AICAU. ¥3 sa So. . 
| DLUCHo poYT : ον φωσφορου.. 


' τ ᾿ TOTHCk Jorn. 


- UOT... 


78 F. W. HASLUCK 
10.—Marble tablet, 0°18 broad, letters ‘015, at Yeni Keui, 


Σεκοῦνδα Ορτη- 
σία Koivtov θυγά- 


Typ χαῖρε 


- For Ορτήσιος = Hortensius cf. C./.A. iil. 10 and 1056, 


11.—At Cyzicus on western wall, found by Mr. J. Gatheral: broken 
block of entablature 0°85 x °050, comprising (1) frieze of bucrania, (2) cyma, 
(3) architrave in two fillets. (The height of letters varies with the line; 
line 1 is on the cyma, and its letters measure ‘03: in lines 2 and 3, 06 and 
‘05 respectively). 


᾿Αγα͵θῆι Τύχηι. 
2 ν]αὸν διαφθαρέντα ὃδ[ιὰ 
ες με ]γέστου καὶ διορθω[ θέντα 


12.—In porch of Church of S. George in an island on Panderma bay 
marble slab 1:00 x 048, letters Ὁ8, 


\ NI ἮΝ AN B δὰ ἡ ὶ Ὁ ὙῪὙ "Avva Βαρίου. 


13.—From hut on mainland opposite S. George. Small stele of woman, 
dog, and slave 0°20 x 0°14, letters ‘01, now at Yeni Keui. 
MHTPOQIA °° Μητρόφιλ[ε 
ΑΡΙΣΤΑΣ ᾿Αρέστας 
TPOQIMH XA PE Tpodiun χα[ῖ]ρε 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM CYZICUS. 79 


The incongruity of the sculpture with the inscription and the grammar 
of χαῖρε find many parallels, 

Another small stele, uninscribed and of poor workmanship, remains in the 
hut. Strabo speaks of a προάστειον opposite the city (575 ad fin.), and worked 
blocks are fairly common here. 


14.—Panderma: in wall at Hagia Trias: fragment of stele with remains 
of standing figure of Asclepius 0°25 x 0°17, letters ‘015. 

[ὁ δεῖνα] 
ὑπὲρ υἱοῦ εὐχὴν 

᾿Ασκληπιῴῷ. 


YNEP YIOY EYXHN 
ACKAHNMIW 


Hitherto the only monument of Asclepius worship at Cyzicus, unfor- 


tunately late. A temple of A. shared with Apollo is mentioned Ath. Mitth. ix. 
28, (32) (Eski Manyas); see note on the Asclepiadae below. 


15.—Jb. Banquet stele 60 x ‘49 of three persons ; letters ‘01. 


Tiporae Διονύσιε 
Σελεύκου Τιμολάου 
χαῖρε χαῖρε. 


10.--ἰ. at Hagia Trias: fragment, 
IT IVN Se Aa 
ὑπ)όμνίημα 
| OY ΓΕ ᾿ΙουἸ]λέου Γεν[τιανοῦ 2 


~ 


| ey ' καὶὶ bie 


80 F. W. HASLUCK 


17.—Panderma : in wall of Greek school, high up: Funeral stele (seated 

woman). ᾿ 

TPYDQEA KAE Τρυφῶσα Κλε[άνδρου ? 
ΧΑΙΡΕ χαῖρε 


18.--ἰ. : in south wall of Armenian Church, high up: Banquet stele 
(four men), 


(ὁ δεῖνα) (ὁ δεῖνα) 
ΟΣΧΙΟΥ ΜΕΝΑΝΔΡ Μ]οσχίου Μενάνδρ[ου 
ΧΑΙΡΕ ΧΑΙΡΕΤΕ χαῖρε χαίρετε 


19.—7b. house of Mustapha Tchaoush: relief of sacrifice to Zeus: left 
slave killing ox; centre, altar with tree? above, on which eagle; right, Zeus 
standing draped holding patera and staff. 


x pe ala “2; os an): ΤΕ, οτος ᾿Ονή]σιμος ὑπὲρ Εὐσεβείαϊς 


For the name Εὐσεβεία cf. below No. 36 ; it may be the common noun (as C.L.G, 
3642), but the first is more in accordance with Cyzicene formulae. The type ΄ 
is similar to that of the stele from Sari Keui, now in the British Museum, de- 
scribed in Ath, Mitth. ix. 58, Rev. Arch. 1891, 10 (though this is earlier), and 
almost identical with another stele said to be from Nicaea (Conze, Lesbos PI. 
xviii.) which tends to confirm Mordtmann’s suggestion (Ath. Mitth. x. 200,30) - 
that the Cybele stele (Conze ad loc. cit. p. xix.) is really from the Cyzicus neigh- 
bourhood ; but no stelae of known Cyzicene provenance are dated, and as far as 
the inscription is concerned, the ‘ Nicaean’ stelae are more closely paralleled by 
a stele from Triglia near Mudania (B.C.H. xvii. 545). Cyzicus possessed lands 
in the region of Daseylion (Strabo, 551, 582) which bax be the provenance 
of all eee 

Zeus Ὕψιστος (see Ramsay, Phryg,. 1. 33) is known at Cyzicus from 
two inscriptions B,C.H. xvii, 520,(1)= Rev. Arch. 1891, 10, JH.S. xxii. 267, ? 
BCH, xvii. 520 (7); cf. also CLG. 3669 θεὸς ὕψιστος, and Zeus Ὕψιστος 
Βρονταῖος Le B.-W. 1099, Mihallitch. 


20,—Aidinjik, curbstone in Armenian quarter: letters about ὍΘ, 
CAKEAOT Or Σακε(ρ)δότος 
for the name Sacerdos οἵ, (16. 3953, (Attouda) 4058 (Ancyra). 


21.--ἰῤ. at Armenian Church, lower half of small stele: letters 02. 


HPAKAEIAI Ἡρακλείδ[η 
XAIPE χαῖρε 


2. The tree, which figures largely in Cyzieus towards the east διὰ τὸ μάλιστα τοὺς Ἕλληνας 
stelae (cf. ¢.g. No. 38, 39 below) is interesting ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς κυπαρίσσαις πλεῖον τὰς θυσίας 
in connection with the Life of S. Philetaerus ἐπιτελεῖν. There are still some very fine cy- 
(Vitae Sanctt. 19 May, ch. iii. § 28) where the presses on the way to Aidinjik. 

Christians cut down the cypresses that stood 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM CYZICUS. 81 


22—7. similar fragment. 


KAMNTHPOS Καμπτῆρος 
OY ANOAAQNIO τ]οῦ ᾿Απολλωνέο[υ 


23.—ib. Stele showing /e/t female figure seated facing holding up hands 
rom elbow; on each side of her a smaller figure ; right, man standing facing 
in himation ; letters Ὁ]. 


. we Ψ 
ne ae 
ees 


Ασκληπιάς 
᾿Ασκληπιάδ[ου 
Περγαμηνὴ χαῖρε 


24.—Stele 0°58 x 0°45, letters ‘03, a wreath in relief above inscription. 


ZEKOYNAA KPI Σεκοῦνδα Kpio- 
NEINAZTOPHSIAE = πεῖνα Σορησίας 
OYFATIPKATESKEY Oryat(n)p κατεσκεύ- 
ΑΣΕΝΤΗΜΊΤΡΙ ασεν τῇ μητρί 


H.S.—VOL. XXIII, G 


82 F. W. HASLUCK 


25.—1b. fragments of small stele : letters ‘01. 


(below relief) API. . KEPKIQNOS Αρι[ε] Kepxiwvos 
X APE ΕΞ χαῖρε 
(up right side) OKATEC [κεύασεν ὁ δεῖνα 


26.—T wo fragments of large slab with irregular letters. 


+ € cicKiaDEF 
COTPY DONO CTT - 
TToy Aoy K ANT ws 
K AIPONOMONAY Toy 


θέσις διαφέρ[ου- 
σα Τρύφ(ω)νος Π[απα ? 
πούλου καὶ τῶν 
κλ(η)ρονόμ(ω)ὴν αὐτοῦ 


27.—A similar fragment. 


θέσις ᾿Αἰντιό ? 


aS GIy MO you . 


28,—1), In Armenian house near the church: stele of Cybele enthroned 
facing; 0°32 x 0°23, letters ‘02. 
ν τ ἘΠΕῚ -..: 


A local epithet of Cybele is probably the solution. 
29.---ἰὸ. Fragment 0°20 x 0°13, letters -02. 


Possibly : 

ὑπ[όμνημα ὃ κατεσκεύασεν - - 

nolos ἑαυτῷ καὶ τῇ γυναικὶ καὶ τῷ 
ὃ ΝῊ Ν “ γὼ, 4 7 ᾽"ν 

παιδὶ ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων. χρημάτων ? ἐὰν 

δὲ κα[ταθήσῃ ἄλλος ἄλλον νεκρὸν 

x , , “Ὁ , 

ἢ συϊλήσῃ δώσει τῷ ταμείῳ 

X,a [καὶ ete. 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM CYZICUS. 83 


30.—ib. House of Hirjeki Oglu Sirkiz, marble slab 0°65 x 0°50 broken 
at bottom and right edge: letters 0°275 and 0°15, 


INNAPX OYNTOY 
IOYAIOY MAIOPOx 
EKOMIZANTA AIKAI¢ 
MOAEITEIASEMIPYAAPX 
MENEMAK OY: &YAI-IS 


TIBE PIOZIOYAIOLAINOY 
PA PIC 

| mere er τ 

Ἰουλίου Madopos [οἵδε 

ἐκόμισαν τὰ δίκαια [τῆς 1 

πολειτείας ἐπὶ φυλάρχ[ου 

Μενεμάχου φυλῆς... 
Τιβέριος ᾿Ιούλιος Φαινος 
T’.”Aptos... 


The formula is probably entire: the inscription appears to be a list of 
persons who ‘received the rights of citizenship’ (ἐκόμισαν τὰ δίκαια 8 τῆς 
πολιτείας) and dates from the second or third century A.D. C.U.G. 3665 
a list of ephebi is somewhat similar, the ephebarch being mentioned in place 
of the phylarch: the latter officer appears frequently in inscriptions of 
Cyzicus, ¢eg.: CLG. 3663, 3664, Ath. Mitth. x. 200 (28), vi. 42 (1), xxvi. 
121, etc. 

The eponymous hipparch (whose praenomen probably filled the space 
at the end of line 1) is hitherto unknown (ef. lists in Ath. Mitth. x. 200, 
07.1.5. xxii. 200). 

No tribe-name (for tribes see Marquardt Cyz. p. 52 ff.) seems short enough 
for the space after φυλῆς : a number may have been substituted as in C.U.G., 
4018, 4019, ete. (Ancyra) Le B-W. 1036 (Alexandria Troas). 


30a.—The inscription (B.C.H. xiv. 520 (38)) in the Greek church reads 
more fully : ᾿ 
Ὑπό]μνημα [...| Jou τοῦ ᾿Επαφροδ[ του ὃ κατε] σκεύα]σεν ἑαυτῷ. ... 


31.—On mainland near Aidinjik road, marble block 0°75 x Ο'δ4χ 0°55 
with relief of horseman and dog: letters 0°2 


3 For dixaa=jura cf. O.1.G. 1486, 1440 τέκνων δίκαιον = jus liberorum. 
: G 2 


ν. HASLUCK 


ο 
sq 


Ὑπόμνημα 

Αὐρ. ᾿Απολλοδώρου υἱοῦ ᾿Απολλ[οδώρου 
ὃ κατεσκεύασεν ἑαυτῷ ἐκ. τῶν ἰδίων 
κ]αὶ τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ [ἐκ]γόν[ οις 
ΑἸύρ. ᾿Απολλοδώ[ρῳ 

καὶ τῇ ἑαυτοῦ [γυναικὶ 
ΧΊρ[υσ]οθύμιδι (sic) καὶ τῇ θρεψάσῃ αὐ- 
told ᾿Επικτήσ(ει) [x] τοῖς τέκνοις αὐτῆἰς 
τοῖς δὲ λοιποῖς ἀπαγο[ρεύ)ω. εἰ δέ τις κατ[αθήσῃ 
ἄχλον δ]ώσει (εἰὴς τό ταμεῖον (δηνάρια)... 


1. 8 stone reads ΕΠΙΚΉΣΙΣ. 


32.—Jb. in wall; marble fragment 0°27 by 0°36 letters (very well cut) 03 
high (there have never been more than two lines, apparently of hexameters). 
CAYNATOLTC ... 0g δυνατός TO 

A\TOICMENOI-KE ... τοῖς πεποίηκε... 


33.—Hammamli. In a house wall, marble block 0°42 x 0:12, letters 
irregular. 


| (K) A Ν Ν STP Εἰς Ἰωάννου πρε(σ)β[ ντέρὸν 


' Kor* πρεβ.-- πρεσβυτέρου cf. JH.S. xix. 180. πρεβτέρου C.1.G4. 9163. 


34.-—At Yapajik (on the peninsula, above Hammamlli), ‘in the fountain, 
large fragment of marble sarcophagus 0°75 x 1°29, letters “04 to +03, ae second 
line erased, the left side water-worn, the right broken off. 


INSCRIPTIONS “FROM CYZICUS. : 85 


BAT) xs). ᾿Νογτον ὙΠΌΜΝΗΜΑ 


KAITHIYNAIKIAYTOYAFAGEA ATAO.O. 
POPE YQ EIAETILANYZACETEPONBAAH 


_ HCYNBOYAEYCHHTTPOZENHEH HAT OPAL 
HAOAONTIONPONTIOIH CHT EPI TOMIMEIC 
TAIMANEICKAITENOCTOEKEINO YAQLEIAEKTOIL 
See AA THOME D|TETATTENO! ATTO ANAT 


Ὑπόμνημα ; 
᾿Αρτέμωνος ? τοῦ β΄, τοῦ καὶ Σκύμγου [6 κατεσκεύασεν ἑαυτῷ 
καὶ τῇ γυναικὶ αὐτοῦ ᾿Αγαθέᾳ ᾿Αγάθωνρς, τοῖς δὲ λοιποῖς ἀπα- 
γορεύω + εἰ δέ τις ἀνύξας ἕτερον βαλῇ [νεκρόν τινα χωρὶς ἐμοῦ 1 
ἢ συνβουλεύσῃ, ἢ προξενήσῃ ἢ ἀγοράσ[ῃ ἢ Cony τὸν τόπον ? 
ἢ δόλον πονηρὸν ποιήσῃ περὶ τὸ μνημεῖον, καὶ ἐκεῖνος γενήσε- 
ταὶ μανεὶς καὶ γένος τὸ ἐκείνον, δώσει δὲ καὶ τῷ ἱερῷ ταμιείῳ Χβφ', διώξου- 1 
σιν δὲ οἱ δαίμονες οἱ τεταγμένοι ἀπὸ ἀναπαύσεως 


᾿Αρτέμων -β΄ occurs in a Cyzicene inscription published in JH.S. xxii, 
p. - 204, 1. 23. Σκύμνος is conjectural, but fits the space, and the slight remains 
of lettering ;* for the spelling ἀνύξας cf. Ath. Mitth. vi. 121. 10 (Cyzieus) 
C.I.G. 3683 (Eumeneia) Le B-W. 1771 (Kespit) B.C_H. iv. 514. Δόλον πονηρόν 
is a literal translation of the legal Latin ‘ dolus malus’ cf. Dittenberger, Sylloge,? 
319. XBp=(Snvapia) 2500 is the usual sum mentioned as the fine for 
τυμβωρυχία. For the elaborate curse on sacrilegious persons ef. C./.G. 2829, 
2831, 2832, 2834, 3915, 4303, Le B. 1104 (Mihallitch) 7d. 1764a, and the 
remarkable C..4. 3891, λήψεται παρὰ τοῦ ἀθανάτου θεοῦ μάστιγα αἰώνιον: 
but I can find no exact parallel, and the restoration is a suggestion only, 
based upon the original length of the stone as given by the distance from 
the middle of ὑπόμνημα to the left edge. πωλήσῃ is warranted by BM. 
ΤΉ ΒΟΥ. ΤΙ. 648, 649. (Ephesus.) ie 


. 88.---, in ἃ private house, broken , marble slab partly hidden by -stair, 
The. first inseription has well-cut letters 0°14 high, the second, thin and 
~ narrow letters 0°13 high, on sunk tabula ansata. δ 


4 The second names are very frequentlyadded also 0.1.6. 8664. In Ath, Mitth. vi. 42 (1), 
pce after 6 β' they are evidently for ᾿ Mepryévns ὃ καὶ Σκοπάνης, Εὐτυχίων β΄ Mauovyhs, 
i A sepa Feber and SoD, ef, ᾿Ασάλη:. tb, xxvi. 121, the-second name. is: barbarous, 
pxov, Ath, Mitth. vi. (42) 2, Ἂ and in 0.1.4. 3705 (Apollonia ad Rh.) we have 
oan J.H.S. xxii. 204. the Greek and Roman names, Gs δ᾽ bon 
Zwalas,'d Ἀρισλανομρνρκὶ a asa Mbdth τρις ἦν in ction for 


86 ; F. W. HASLUCK 


AN OttuivH 


> TOTAYKY 


| INYNNET 


Ὑπόμνημα | Ανδιγόνη[ς (2) ὃ κατεσκεύασεν ἑαυτῇ 
(καὶ) τῷ γλυκυ[τάτῳ ἀνδρί... 


I can see no other restoration of the first line, though I have no 
parallel for the spelling. In 1. 2 the symbol « is used for καὶ. Ramsay 
(Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia ch. x. app. I. p. 379), comments on the 


frequency of mythological and epic names in the Phrygian district, cf. above 
No. 31 Χρυσόθυμις. 


36.—1b. In another house, fragment, 0°62 broad, letters about 0°8. 


Ὁ Ὑ ς Ρ̓ | AC Εὐσεβίας 
Pe ΑΥΤΙ pos Λανπρός 


For the name Εὐσέβεια, οἵ. 0.1.4. 3574, 5751. 


37.—tb. house of Papadoghlu Costakis, fragment 0°97 broad, with 
irregular letters. . 


Py Nee ΓΝ 
+ BE CIC JIAVE Pol "τς 
(TEWAN CUrATTAA pe 
pee 


γυνεκὶ 

- θέσις διαφέρο(υ)σα 

εν [Π)ωάν(νῃ) καὶ Πλακη- 
δίλ[λῃ 


An extraordinarily illiterate text calling for drastic restoration, cf. «7.1.8. 


97-417 (19) HOANHC -- Ἰωάννης ; Πλακήδιλλα apparently a diminutive form 
of Placida. 


38.—From Sarikeui (Zeleia), now at Yeni Keui. Small stele 0°36 x 
0:22 with relief of Hekate ? enthroned facing: with her right hand she 
extends a patera to two worshippers who approach her altar (behind it is a 
tree) with a victim. To her left is a dog seated, letters 0125. 


Β᾽) 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM CYZICUS. 87 
AZKAHITA,..... Ω ᾿Ασκληπᾶς [Ποτάμ ?|o 
NOSYTTE vos ume[p ἑαυτοῦ 
KAITHE καὶ τῆς[ γυναικὸς 1 
φιλο Piro... 


For Hekate Artemis at Cyzicus cf. the relief in Perrot and Guillaume 
Galatie, Vol. II. pt. iv., and A.M. ix..63 (Ὁ. A mutilated Hekate triformis was 
brought to Mr, de Rustafell in December 1901. 

A fragmentary inscription in a house opposite St. John’s Church in 
Artaki, which I was not allowed to copy, may perhaps be recorded from my 
note book : the stone is broken on both sides and the letters are about Ὁ 
high. The general sense runs Ὑ]πόμν[ημα ᾿Αλεξάνδρου τοῦ [δεῖνος ὃ] κατε- 
σκεύασεν ἑαυτῷ καὶ τῇ θυγατρὶ αὐτοῦ ἙἭἍἩρμιόϊνῃ. I have not ventured to 
bracket the restored portions in the middle of the inscription, as the whole 
depends ultimately on my memory and is of course subject to correction. 


39.—By the kindness of Dr. Washburn I am enabled to publish the 
inscription on the larger of two votive stelae preserved in the Museum at 
Robert College, Bebek. They were both brought from Cyzicus by Dr. Long, 
and probably belong to the series of stelae found near Artaki and mentioned 
in Σύλλογος vil. p. 164 (commentary on inscr. 5): most of these, Dr. 
Mordtmann told me, found their way to Tchinlykiosk.® The smaller Bebek 
stele exhibits a relief of sacrifice to Apollo Citharoedus, and, Mr. Henderson 
tells me, scant remains of an inscription: the larger has two reliefs, (1) wor- 
ship of Apollo, tree in background : (2) crater flanked by (r.) female figure 
carrying cushion on her head, (I.) boy leading ram. The crater is prominent 
in the upper relief of C./.G..3669 and evidently refers to the sacred feast 
which was a characteristic feature of the local religion, cf. B.C.H. xxiii. 592. 
I am indebted to Mr. Henderson for sketches of these stelae : the larger reads : 


MHAEIOZSKAIAIOAQPOS Μηδεῖος καὶ Διόδωρος 
ΟἹ ΑΔΑΜΑΝΤΟΣ ATTOAAQNI οἱ ᾿Αδάμαντος ᾿Απολλῶνιε 
KPATEANQ ΧΑΡΙΣΤΗΡΙΟΝ Κρατεανῷ χαριστήριον — 


Of Apollo Crateanos (from Crateia in Bithynia?®) we have numerous 
stelae from near Eski Manyas,’ and one from Cyzicus is published in B.C.H. 
xvii. 521. The former read consistently εὐχὴν for the Cyzicene χαριστήριον : 
the Apollo is invariably of the Citharoedus type, and the inscriptions date 
from the first century B.C. or earlier, all names being Greek. 

The uninscribed stele (measuring some ‘60 by ‘30 metre) of Apollo 


i Citharoedus standing full face holding the lyre in his left hand, and patera 


tas 


8 " No. 189 (provenance unknown) dedicated 6 Arch, Zeit. 1876, p. 113. 


ipeaiert καὶ ᾿Αρτέμιδι χαριστήριον 7 Jb. 1875, 162. Arch. Epig. Mitth. xix. 
ot ate to the series: ὅθ. One is illustrated in Benndorf, Lykien, 


nna vo th B64 Mdaaticgh.... 


CS 


88 F. W. HASLUCK 


in his right, which was found by Mr. Th. Makrys and myself at the Armenian 
church in Aidinjik, possibly belongs to the series. In the archaistic treat- 
ment of the drapery it probably copies a cultus image. 

Apollo in the Cyzicus district seems to be identical with the son-god of 
Phrygia. His connection with Zeleia is mentioned so early as Homer, (JI. 2. 
827, cf. also Schol. ad Il. iv. 103), and his immense popularity in the villages 
(μάλιστα κατὰ τῆν ἐφορίαν τῆς Κυζίκου) is remarked by Strabo.® At Cyzicus 
itself he was apynyérys,!° as at Hierapolis,' and on at least one stele from | 
Cyzicus 15 he is associated with the mother of the Gods. He appears again | 
with Zeus”Tyioros and Artemis Hekate in Rev. Arch. 1891, 10. (1), with 
which we may compare the conjunction of gods in Ramsay Phrygia® 566, No. | 
468, and possibly the τρέτευμα of Ramsay op. cit. I. 337, 171. 

For other monuments of Apollo at Cyzicus see O.1.G. 3669 (with 
Artemis) = σύλλογος vii. 164 (5): Ath. Mitth. ix. 25: Rev. Arch. 1891, p. 10 
Ταδοκωμείτης, Ath. Mitth. ix. 18 (4): ib. x. 200, (34), and for literary sources 
Marquardt Cyzicus, p. 128 ff. 


F. W. HAsiLuck. 


8 I saw in the same place the lower part of a ΞΡ. δι, 
small stele much worn representing a statue of 10. Aristides, 1, 383. 
Apollo approached by five worshippers, and 11 Ramsay, Phryg. 1, 87 ff. 
another fragment with a bull couchant, appar- 2 Ath. Mitth, x. 200 (30). Miicihsaicas ee 
ently from a sacrificial scene. compares Conze, Lesbos, Pl. XIX. - 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM CYZICUS. 89 


r 


Nome ΟΝ THE Fawty OF THE ASCLEPIADAE AT Ovnters. 


sh ὃ Se Athenische Mittheilungen (ix. 28. (32)), Dr. Lolling published 
without comment upon the subject matter an inscription said to have come 
_ from _Eski-Manyas, but evidently referring to Cyzicus, of which a portion 
survives in a very worn condition, built into the well-head of Hagia Triada 
at Panderma. The inscription dates from early Imperial times and com- 
memorates one Demetrius, son of  Oeniades, son of Asclepiades, and 
several members of his family who had_ rendered important services to 
the state. 
_ The text of the inscription is, for the sake of clearness, given in 
minuscule below. 


[ὁ ἀνα 
εἶν ἐπίσχεο, 
δῶνα ἀνα... pe 
᾿ καὶ τοὺς a[AXov]s [π]|ο[λέτας. 
5 αὐτῶν ἐπὶ [διασ]άφησ[ζιν 1 υδιὲ 


᾿κήρυκ[ος] δημοσίᾳ τὸ πρᾶγμα 1 τ Δη- 
μήτ[ρ]ιον Οἰνιάδ[ου] ἀρ[ετῆς ἕ]ν[εκεν καὶ εὐνοίας 
στεφανοῦσθαι δὲ αὐτὸν καὶ ἐν τοῖς .. μένοις 1YA! 
τῶν ᾿Ῥ[ωἹμαέων [ἀ]ναγορεύοντος [τ]οῦ κ[ἡρυκοὴς ὅτι [6] ξῆμος στεφανοῖ 
ΝΣ Ὁ. ΠΑῦμρε" 01 
10 τριον Οἰνιάδο[ν πάσης ἀ[ρ]ετῆς [ἕ]ν[εκεν ὁμ]οίως δὲ ἐπερύρονοναι 
αὐτὸν καὶ 
7 ἐν τοῖς κατ᾽ ἐνιαυτὸν τιθεμ[έ]νο[ες εὐχ]αριστηρίοις ἀγῶσιν ‘Hpoos 
τῷ πάπ- 
mp αὐτοῦ ᾿Ασκληπιάδη τῷ οἰκί[ιστῇ καὶ τ]οῖς συναγωνισαμένοις αὐτῷ 
κατ᾽ ᾿Α- ’ 
λεξανδρείαν ἐν τῷ [κα]τ[ ἃ] . . . πο]λ[ἐμῳ μετὰ τὰς τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ 
καὶ τοῦ θείου στεφανώσεις [avay]o[pevovt]os [τ]οῦ κήρυκος ὅτι ὁ δῆμος 
στεφανοῖ 


1ὅ Δημήτριον Οἰνιάδου τοῦ ᾿Ασκληπιάδου πάσης γενόμενον ἄξιον τιμῆς τῇ 
᾿ς πατρίδι, ἀνατεθῆναι δὲ ἀυτῷ εἰκ[όνα τελείαν] γραπτὴν ἐν ὅπλῳ 
ἐπιχρύσῳ καὶ [ἄγ)]αλμα pap[uapw ov [ἐν τ]ῷ ᾿Ασκληπιοῦ καὶ ᾿Απόλλωνος 
"τος ἱερῷ(ι) 
; ὕφ᾽ ἃ ὑπογράψαι 6: ὅτι ὁ δῆμος Δημήτριον Οἰνιάδου rob ᾿Ασκληπιάδου 
διὰ τῆς τς 
ἔκ τε αὐτοῦ καὶ τῶν προγόνων εἰς τὴν πόλιν εὐεργεσίας: ἀνατεθῆναι 
39 δ Ὃ στήλην [λε]υκὴ[ν λιθ]εία[υ] πρὸ τοῦ γυμνασίου ἐν τῇ κατασκευ- 
τς akouévy στοᾷ [τῷ δήμ]ῳ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ Διονυσίου τοῦ 
“ ἌΡΑ Ὁ ἐκ τοῦ ἰδίου βίου ἐφ᾽ ἣν ἐν τῇ συντελουμένῃ ὑπὸ τοῦ δή- 
(ἢ τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ Οἰνιάδου τοῦ rete τρί 


a. ate. ἜΤ δι ες 4 φ as τς: 
ἡ». te 


90 F. W. HASLUCK 


25 ἀγομένοις Kat’ ἐνιαυτὸν ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχόντων TOD γυμνασίου ἀπὸ τοῦ 
c , \ \ ‘ 4 S39 / \ a ‘ > 4 
Ηρῴου, τοὺς δὲ νέους καὶ ἐφήβους καὶ παῖδας τὴν ἐσομένην στεφάνω- 
σιν αὐτοῦ [παραπ]έμπειν καὶ ἐπισημοῦσθαι ἀναγορεύοντος τοῦ κήρυκος 
ὅτι ὁ δῆμος στεφανοῖ Δημήτριον Οἰνιάδου τοῦ ᾿Ασκληπιάἄδου τῆς διὰ 
προγόνων εὐ[ν]ο[ {]α[ς] εἰς τὸν δῆμον ἕνεκεν, ποιουμένου τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν 
90. τῆς ἀναγορεύσεως τοῦ στεφάνου τοῦ κατ᾽ ἐνιαυτὸν γυμνασίαρχου, 
> fol \ > \ / Ν > ͵ a a ‘ 
ἀναγραφῆναι δὲ εἰς τὴν oT[HANV], Kal ἀντέγραφον τοῦδε TOD ψηφίσ- 
ματος, τὸ [δε] ψήφισμα [εἶναι ὑπὲρ τῆς σ]ωτηρίας τῆς πόλεως. 


The name Asclepiades, a particularly common one at Cyzicus, at once 
throws our thoughts back to the Healing God, and in its present. connection 
to the sanctuary of Pergamon,! whose relations with Cyzicus are well-known.? 
The family probably migrated to Cyzicus during the period of Pergamene 
influence when to judge by the inscription before us, Asclepius was settled 
in a pre-existing temple of Apollo: such an arrangement finds many 


parallels. 


We can trace the Asclepiadae as early as the second half of the second 


century B.C. 


A Machaon son of Asclepiades served on several embassies and 


fought for Cyzicus in the war with Aristonicus,? and as late as Gallienus we 
5 y: ) 
find an Asclepiades serving as strategos. 

The inscription before us reveals the family’s history for three generations. 


The persons mentioned are : 
(1) Asclepiades,® 


grandfather of Demetrius, who served in the Alex- 


andrian ® war, and in whose honour the Heroa were instituted (1. 11). 
(2) Oeniades, father of Demetrius, crowned (1. 14), assisted in the 


building of a καταδρομή, possibly some kind of eryptoporticus. 


Aelian N.A. 


ix. 1, etc., uses the word of a beast’s lair. 
(3) Uncle of Demetrius crowned (I. 14). 
(4) Demetrius, awarded two crowns,’ proclamation, life-sized picture on a 
gilded panel, and a marble statue in the temple of Apollo and Asclepius. 
(5) Dionysius, brother of Demetrius, who built a portico for the city. 
Two other inscriptions ὃ relating to ‘Cleidice daughter of Asclepiades,’ 
who held several important priesthoods at Cyzicus, and was honoured by a 


1 Cf. inser, 23 above. 

2 Cf. Marquardt Cyzicus, p. 72 ff., and J. H.S. 
xxii. 193. 

3 Monatsh. Kin. Preuss. Akad. Berl. 1889, i. 
367. 

4 Mionnet. Supp. 460, 461; Wadd. Coll. 770. 
Cf. also Ath. Mitth. vi. 42 (2) γραμματεύοντος 
᾿Ασκληπιάδου β' Ἐενάρχου. 

5 Why is Asclepiades called οἰκιστής 1 Can 
he have founded an Asclepiad colony at Poe- 
manenon, Where stood a ‘holy and famous’ 
shrine of Asclepius in Aristides’ day (I. 502, 
Dind.)? It is curious that another Asclepiad 
honorary inscription comes also from Manyas 


(Rev, Arch. 34, 1877, 102, (4) Hamilton 318) 


which has been frequently identified with 
Poemanenon; but cf. Journ. Roy. Geog. Soc. 
1897, p. 160. 

8. The letters after ᾿Αλεξανδρείαν, ENTOI. 


ATAINO.,, -AY..... AIMQI must 
surely be restored ἐν τῷ κατὰ Πτολεμαῖον πολέμῳ. 
Hirtius (de bell Alex. 13) tells us that Caesar’s 
fleet included twelve ships ‘from Asia.’ The 
Cyzicenes also sent a contingent to help Caesar 
against the Pompeians in Africa. C.J.G. 3668. 

7 The first festival mentioned, 11. 8-9 ἐν τοῖς 
[τιθε 3] μένοις [ἀγῶσιν 2... . ὑπὸ] τῶν Ῥωμαίων 
is perhaps the Μουκιεῖα (see J.H.S. 1897, 
p. 268, [27]) 

5. 0.1.6. 3657. Ath, Mitth, vii. 152. 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM CYZICUS. . 91 


religious guild with a statue and a picture, seem to me to belong to the 
records of the family. In the former the dedicators ask for the concession of 
a place for the statue ἐν τῇ ἀνδρήᾳ ἀγορᾷ ἐπὶ τοῦ προγονικῆ ς" αὐτῆς 
συνεδρίου τοῦ ἀπὸ δύσεως τοῦ ἀνδριάντος τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτῆς Διονυσίου τοῦ 
᾿Ασκληπιάδου, which shews that her family had been influential at Cyzicus 
for several generations: moreover we have seen that the name Dionysius 
was in the family and that an uncle of Demetrius was crowned. 
The stemma would thus stand : 


Asclepiades (flor. cire. 47 B.c.) 


[ | ) 
Oeniades (Dionysius (i)) _ Cleidice 


Demetrius Dionysius ii 


A lucky find may enable us to fill the gap between Machaon (ce. 130 A.D.) 
and Asclepiades, or to establish the connection of Hippias son of Asclepiades 
(Rev. Arch. 34, 1877. 102. (4)). 


I take this opportunity to make the following corrections and additions to my article 
in J.H.S. xxii. 126 ff. 


P. 131, Note 8. I could hear nothing of the inscription Ath. Mitth. vi. 42 at Cyzicus, 
but venture to suggest the following restoration (which involves very slight changes in the 
text) of the still incomplete ll. 3—6. Σέξτον Ἰούλιον [Κότυν ΚΚότυ]ος δυνάστου Θραΐ κῶν vi] ov 
ὄντα] καὶ θυγατ[ριδοῦν τοῦ Θρακ]ῶν duv[aorov Ροι]μητ[άλκα, βασι]λίσσης, etc. S. Julius 
Cotys may be ἃ brother of the C, Julius Cotys mentioned on a coin οὗ Laodicea struck 
under Titus (Coll. Wadd. 6271). 

P. 132, Note 1. This prince has been identified with Satala, grandfather of Cotys by 
Mommsen (Eph. Epig. 11. 251) who rightly insists that Tryphaena was married to Cotys 
when she became priestess of Livia (ib. 255). The chronology of Tryphaena has lately 
been discussed from coins by M. Th. Reinach Num. Chron. 1902, I. 4. 

ib. Note 7. I prefer to consider that pirates (cf. C.J.G. 3612) were the cause of the 
blocking of the ewripi. The manoeuvre is designed to ‘secure communication with the 
mainland, thus implying that an attack was feared from the sea. The Thracian troubles 
were internal. 


® Cf. 1. 19 of the Demetrius inscription : also a son of an Asclepiades’, but adds his 
τὰς ἔκ τε αὐτοῦ Kal τῶν προγόνων εὐεργεσίας grandfather’s name to distinguish him from 


It may be noted that one of the signatories of Cleidice’s branch. 
the proposed inscription for the statue in (2) is 


EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 
(Puates [., IL] 


THE following enquiry has been undertaken in the hope that it may 
assist in clearing away some of the difficulties that surround the identific- 
ation of the royal portraits occurring on silver coins that bear the simple 
inscription ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ANTIOXOY. ‘Jncerta omnia et ambigua’ was the 
verdict with which Eckhel dismissed his discussion of the question. Since 
that judgement was pronounced, not a little light has been thrown on the 
dark places of the Seleucid series. This particular problem, however, still 
awaits a final solution. Under present conditions, most numismatists will be 
ready to admit that their own opinions are not undeserving of the description 
applied by Eckhel to those of Vaillant—‘vaga, fluctuantia, et saepe secwm 
ipsis pugnantia. My experience in connection with the Hunter Cabinet has 
convinced me that what I may call the method of general attack is not likely 
to carry us far beyond the point that has been already reached. If there is 
to be further progress, there must ke a change of tactics. Attention must 
be concentrated on well-defined groups, which should be subjected to as close 
a scrutiny as possible. If this is done systematically, there can be little 
doubt but that the tangled skein® will be unravelfed. The present paper is 
intended to furnish a specimen of the line of treatment I would advocate. 

A short statement of the case may be useful. From the time of 
Antiochus IV. onwards, the Seleucid kings were in the habit of placing upon 
their coins the surnames or distinctive titles by which they were known. 
The various portraits of the later monarchs can thus be determined with 
almost as much ease and certainty as can the portraits of the Roman 
Emperors. But, during the first hundred and thirty years of the dynasty’s 
existence, the practice alluded to was, with one fortunate exception, absolutely 
unknown.2 The exception is the titlé Soter, which, as we learn from 
Appian (Syr. 65), was bestowed on Antiochus I. in recognition of his having 


1 Besides the indispensable catalogues of in Num. Chron., 1883, (3rd series, vol. 111), 
Prof. Gardner (Seleucid Kings of Syria, 2 It is possible, on other grounds, to distin- 
London, 1878), and M. Babclon (Rois de Syrice, guish satisfactorily the portraits of the first 
etc., Paris, 1890), see the late Sir E. H. Bunbury — four kings who bore the name of Seleucus. See 
on ‘Unpublished Coins of the Kings of Syria’ Gurdner, Selewcid Kings, pp. xviii. f. 


ee eS ee ννα 


note by Prof. Gardner in the same volume of 


o 


EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 93 


stemmed the invasion of the Galatae. On the rare silver and copper coins 
on which it is found, the inscription ΣΩΤΗΡΟΣ ANTIOXOY is invariably 
associated with a head that wears the stamp of unmistakable individuality, 
an association that justifies us in immediately setting aside, as also 
belonging to Antiochus I., a large number of pieces on which the same head | 
appears unaccompanied by the distinctive title. In somewhat similar fashion, 
at the lower end of the scale, we are in a position to identify Antiochus III. 
owing to the accident that, during his reign, the coins are occasionally dated ; 
and we are thus enabled to dispose of another considerable group of pieces 
which, though undated, bear a portrait that approximates more or less closely 
to the head upon the dated coins. But, when all is done, there still remain 
many that cannot readily be brought into line with either the one or the other 
of our fixed types, while there are, even within this remainder, differences so 
clearly marked as to make it impossible to assign the whole to any one 
prince. It is generally admitted that the majority of them must belong to 
Antiochus II. It has long been recognised that some of them were probably 
struck by Antiochus Hierax in the course of the fratricidal war which, as ‘ king’ 
of Asia Minor, he waged against Seleucus II. More recently a third possible 
claimant has come forward in the person of Antiochus, son of Antiochus ITT., 
whom we now know to have borne the title βασιλεύς for many years before 
his untimely death. Lastly, family resemblances are apt to be misleading, 
and it is always conceivable that, in the absence of certain knowledge as to 
the actual features of Antiochus II., coins that really belong to him may*®have 
come to be attributed either to his father or to his grandson. The phrase 
‘absence of certain knowledge’ may seem unduly suggestive of scepticism. 
The fact, however, is that, while some well-known groups of coins are 
assigned to this king by general consent, the reasoning by which the con- 
clusion has been reached is too purely negative to be convincing. No secure 
basis for iconography has yet been established.* For the rest, it is literally 
true to say that every writer who attempts to deal with the subject, produces 
anew portrait of Hierax,—a rule to which I fear that I am not destined to 
form any exception. 


The set of coins that has been selected for detailed examination now is 
that consisting of tetradrachms on which the diadem worn by the king is 
furnished with wings. The choice was determined by obvious considerations. 
Firstly, it seemed that it would be easy to show that the bulk of these pieces 
had been issued from the same mint. Secondly, a preliminary survey had 
disclosed the fact that the portraits upon them varied in a more marked 


. degree than is usually supposed. If, then, it proved possible to arrange the 


different issues chronologically on numismatic grounds and without any 
reference to the particular individuals who may have issued them, we should 
have a basis from which deductions might with some confidence be drawn. 


7 


* See Bunbury’s paper passim, and also the the Num. Chron. (1883, pp. 261 ff.). 


94 GEORGE MACDONALD. 


The method here outlined is not a new one. A classic example of its use 
is Imhoof-Blumer’s admirable monograph on the money of the Pergamene 
Kings. But, so far as I am aware, its application has not yet been extended 
to the coinage of the Seleucidae. 

The first step necessary was the accumulation of sufficient material. It 
is a pleasure to acknowledge the readiness with which the owners or the 
custodians of the collections concerned responded to requests for casts. 
Thanks to their assistance, as well as to that of those who made vain search 
in other cabinets, the list that follows may be regarded as fairly complete. 
It includes all published examples, so far as their present whereabouts could _ 
be traced, and also several that are now described for the first time. In two 
instances (Nos. 27 and 34) photographic reproductions only were available. 
In all other cases either the originals or good plaster casts have been at my 
disposal for study. Roman numerals are employed to indicate the chrono- 
logical divisions into which the series falls, parallel groups being distinguished 
by the addition of letters of the alphabet. For convenience of reference, 
Arabic numerals have been added, running consecutively from beginning to 
end. The relative order as given by these last is, however, of small 
importance. Within the main divisions the arrangement cannot be more 
than roughly approximate. Where different specimens are enumerated 
under the same number, it is to be understood that they are from the same 
dies on both sides. Where the mathematical sign of equality is employed, it 
means not merely that the two specimens thus connected are from the same 
dies, but that they are identical. All the coins included in the list are tetra- 
drachms of ordinary Euboic-Attic weight. 


LIST OF COINS. 
TI. A. 


1. Head of youth r., wearing winged BAZIAEQ= Apollo, naked but for 
diadem ; nose slightly aquiline; ANT ΙΟΧΟῪ drapery over r. thigh, 
cheek and chin round and full; seated 1. on omphalos; he looks 
border of dots. _ along an arrow held, point down- 

wards, in r., and leans with 1. on 

top of bow, which stands on the 
ground behind him; in ex., horse 
grazing r.; in field L, inside inser., 


{ and ΕΝ. 


Pl. I., 7-- Berlin (Imhoof). 


4 Die Miinzen der Dynastie von Pergamon Wissenschaften, 1884). 
(Abhandl. der Kénigl. Preuss. Akademie der ἑ 


—— =. δ5δὋὄ}Ὺ}ὃ8 ~~ —_ 
᾿ 


Vw 


~ 
- 


EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 95 


if 


2. Elderly male head 1, wearing 
winged diadem ; nose long and 
straight; eye deeply sunk ; cheek 
and neck thin, with traces of 
lines; border of dots. 


B. 


BASIAEQS Similar type; beneath,® 
ANT loXOY horse grazing r.; in 
field 1. and r., outside inscr., fe 


and &. 


Pl. I., 8=The Hague=Nwm. Chron. 1898, p. 234, No. 1. 


Il. 


3. Head of youth r., wearing winged 
diadem ; border of dots. 


BASIAEQS Similar type; in front 
ANTIOXOY of Apollo’s r. knee, 
bee (7) upwards. 


Pl. I., 9=Babelon, Rois de Syric, p. 38, No. 284.° 


4. Similar head; cheek 
fuller; border of dots. 


slightly | 


ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ Similar type; in 6Χ,, 

ANTI ΟΧΟῪ horse grazing I|.; in 
field r., outside inscr., S$; in ex., 
behind horse, bx. 


Pl. I., 10=The Hague= Num. Chron, 1898, p. 234, No. 2. 


III. 


5. Male head r., wearing winged 
diadem; adult type; border of 
dots. 


BAZIAEQ= Similar type; in ex. 

ANT lOXOY horse grazing r.; in 
field 1., outside inscr., ὡς ! above 
Apollo’s r. arm, ΚΖ. 


Pl. I., 11=Sir H. Weber; H. O. O’Hagan= Bunbury Sale Catal. ii. No. 453=Leake, 


Num, Hellen. Suppl. p. 4. 


r¥...a. 


6. Similar head r.; face older and 
less full. 


PL I., 12=Berlin. 


ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ Similar type; in ex., 
ANTI OXOY horse grazing 1; in 
field 1. and σι, outside inser., 


Ἔ (ὃ and Ay. 


5 The use of the word ‘beneath’ implies that 
there is no exergual line. 

® In the case of specimens in the Biblio- 
théque Nationale, I give the reference to 
Babelon only, except for No. 18 which is so 
seriously misdescribed in Mionnet that it 


would be difficult to identify it in Babelon’s 


list. Mionnet gives No. 3 under Antiochus 
Hierax (v. pp. 21 f.). The other Paris pieces were 
originally placed by him under Antiochus II. 
(v. p. 16). Butin his Supplement (viii. p. 17) 
he withdraws this attribution, and assigns the 
whole to Hierax. 


96 GEORGE MACDONALD 


7. Similar. BAZIAEQS Similar type; in ex., 
ANTIO XOY horse grazing |.; in 
field 1., outside inser., SF and KC. 
Sir H. Weber. 


8. Same die as No. 7. . BAZIAEQS Similar type; in ex., 
ANTI OXOY horse grazing 1., the 
ground being represented by a 
line; in field 1. and r., outside 
inscr., + and [7]. 
Pl. 1., 13=E. J. Seltman= Montagu Sale Catal., i. No. 6957; Babelon, Lois de Syrie, 
p. 29, No. 214. 


9. Same die as No. 7. | BASIAEQS Similar type; in ex., 

ANTI OXOY horse grazing 1.; in 

field 1. and r., outside inser., ‘{ (2) 
‘and A (Ὁ 


Babelon, Rois de Syric, p. 80, No. 216; A. von Petrowicz. 


IV. B. 


10. Head of boy r., wearing winged | BAZIAEQS Similar type; in ex. 

diadem. ANTIOXOY horse grazing 1, the 
ground being represented by a 
line; in field ]. and r., outside inscr., 


> and fj (2) 


Pl,.If,,. 1 =Hunter: 


11. Similar head.§ BASIAEQS Similar type; in ex., 
ANTIOXOY horse grazing r.; in 
field 1., outside inscr., 4 and Κί. 
F. McClean=Carfrae Sale Catalogue, No. 299 (Ρ]. X. 8). 


Vien: 


12. Male head r., wearing winged | BAZIAEQS Similar type; in ex., 
diadem ; adult type; features | AN TIOXOY horse grazing 1.; in 
resembling Nos. 6 ff, but | field r., outside inscr., Ry; in ex., 
slightly idealised. behind horse, BS. 


Pl. I1., 3=The Hague. 


7 The specimen engraved in Vaillant, Hist. identical with this specimen I am unable to 
Regum Syriae, p. 45, appears (so far as one can say. ~ 
judge from the imperfect representation) to 8 It is with hesitation that I have decided 
belong to this class. But whether it is that this is not from the same die as No. 10. 


97 
— ( Υ͂. 8. 
13. Head of youth r., wearing winged | ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ Similar type; in ex., 
_ diadem. ; ANTI OXOY horse grazing 1.; in 
- field 1., outside inser., N4 (7), and, 
inside inser., KC. 

The Hague 

14. Same die as No, 13. | ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ - Similar type; beneath, 


ANTI OXOY horse grazing 1.; in 
field |. outside inser., Μ and KC. 
Pl. I1., 3=Rollin et Feuardent. 


15. Same die as No. 13. | Similar ; style almost barbarous. 
Pl. II., 4=The Hague; A. Loebbecke. 


Lee 


16. Male head r., wearing winged ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ  Snuilar type ; in ex,, 
. diadem ; adult type ; foatures | ANTIO XOY horse grazing r.; in 
ῬΚΑΟΦ ΣΉΝ No. 5, but idealised. | field |., inside inscr., KC and f4, 


Pl. 11.,) 5=Babelon, Hots de Syrie, p. 29, No. 212. 


17. Similar head. BASIAEQS Similar type; in ex., 
ANTI OXOY horse grazing 1.; in 
field 1., outside inscr., >} and ψφῬ. 


B.M.C. p. 14, No. ὅ (Pl. V. 2); Berlin; A. Loebbecke. 


18. Same die as No. 17. . | BASIAEQE Similar type; in ex., 
ANTIOXOY horse grazing |.; in 
field 1., outside inscr., >} (7) and 


Ῥ. 


Babelon, Kois de Syrie, p. 29, No. 215=Mionnet v. p. 16, No. 147. 


19. Similar head, | ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ Similar type ; in ex.,, 
ANT lOXOY horse grazing 1. ; to 1: 
and r. of horse, Dp and MM. 


Pl. 11., 6=F.M.C., p. 14, No. 7; Berlin. 


. = BASIAEQ= = Similar. : 

| ANTIOXOY τ Ἂς 

.». Ἐ 4 ΤΥ, 
οἱ αν ot, No. 78)=Montagu Sele Cota iy No. 831. τυ 1.5} 


- ἄμ, 


ora 


98 GEORGE MACDONALD 


21. Same die as No. 19, BASIAEQS Similar type ; beneath, 
ANTIOXOY horse grazing 1.; to L. 
and r. of horse, ξε and MY. 


Berlin ; Vienna; Munich ; A. Loebbecke; F. McClean= 7'obin Bush Sale Catal. No. 202 
(from the Huber Collection). 


22. Same die as No. 19. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ Similar type ; beneath, 
ANTIOXOY horse grazing 1. ; to 1. 
of horse, 4 M. 


Babelon, Rois de Syrie, p. 29, No. 213; Berlin; Turin (Catalogo Generale dei Musei di 
Antichita, iii. p. 328, No. 4559).° 


23. Same die as No. 19. | BASIAEQS Similar type; in ex., 
ANT ΙΟΧΟῪ horse grazing 1.; to 1. 


| _ and r, of horse, x and M. 
Berlin, 


24. Similar head. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ Similar type ; beneath, 
AN TICXOY horse grazing r.; in 


field 1., outside inscr., Pg and KC. 
Pl if... ΞΡ p. 14, No. 6; Hunter. 


25. Same die as No. 24, | Similar. 

G. Philipsen= Bunbury Sale Catal. ii, 452. 
26. Same die as No. 24. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ Similar type; in ex., 
AN TIOXOY horse grazing |.; be- 
| hind horse, Dp; in field r., inside 


inscr., >: 


Berlin, 


27. Same die as No. 24. Same die® as No. 26; with ΓΣ in 


place of Dp. 


Bunbury Sale Catal. ii, 451 (Pl. TV.) 


28, Same die as No, 24. | BASIAEQS = Similar type; beneath, 
| AN TIOXOY horse grazing 1.; to 1. 


of horse, BR >. 


The Hague. 


® This specimen is considerably worn, but 1 or of No. 26, and I am unable to say which 
ain satisfied as to the identity of the dies. represents the first form of the die, 
84. T have not seen the original either of this 


EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 99 


29. Same die as No, 24. BAZIAEQE Similar type; in ex., 

ANTI ΟΧΟῪ horse grazing r.; in 
field 1., outside inser., .%, and, be- 
neath inser., ΚΙ, 

Gotha. KC 


30. Same die as No. 24. BAZIAEWS Similar type; in ex,, 

ANTI OXOY horse grazing r.; in 
field 1, outside inser., p%, and be- 
neath inscr:, KC, 


Berlin (Imhoof)= Num. Zeitschr., 1895, Pl. 11., 17; Babelon, Rois de Syrie, p. 29, No. 211. 


31. Similar head. BAZIAEWS Similar type; in ex., 
ANTI OXOY horse grazing r.; in 
field 1., outside inser, p&, and, 

| beneath inser., kf (?). 


Pl. 11., 8=Cambridge= Leake, Num. Hellen., p. 23. 


32. Similar head. [BA]ZIAEQE= Similar type ; in ex., 
ere eae horse grazing l.; be- 
fore Apollo’s knee, female head !,, 
(helmeted ?); in field 1., above, 


M (?). 


Pl. I1., 9=The Hague. 


33. Similar head. | BAZIAEQES Similar type; in ex., 
ANTIOXOY © round shield 19 to |. and 
τ. of which, PX and ¥, 


Pl. I1., 10= Berlin (Fox) = Leake, Nwm. Hellen. Suppl., p. 4. 


34. Similar head. {| BAZIAEQE Similar type; in ex., 
ANTIOXOY round shield, to 1. and 
r. of which, ? and x, 


Catal. Watcher de Molthein, No, 2892 (Pl. XXIV.) 


A technical point demands attention at the outset. In his very careful 
and interesting paper on Unpublished Coins of the Kings of Syria, Sir E. H. 
Bunbury incidentally remarks that ‘we have many instances of the combin- 
ation of the same die on the reverse with different obverses and vice versd.’ 1! As 
applied to the class of coins of which Bunbury was writing, the statement 
requires modification. The list given above does not contain a single 


” Leake (J. 6.) describes this symbol ἃ8 electrotype to be the ends of a wreath, seem to 
** Boeotian shield in wreath.” Dr. von Fritze, be merely marks due to oxidation. 
who has been good enough to examine the 1 Num. Chron. 1883, p. 77. 
original for me, writes that what appear on the 
H 2 


- 


100 GEORGE MACDONALD 


example of a reverse die combined with more than one obverse. The ‘vice 
versé, on the other hand, is abundantly illustrated. A precisely similar 
result emerges from Mr. Hill’s analysis of the dies of a particular set of the 
coins of Nagidus.!*. Other districts present contrary instances, so that no 
general Jaw can be laid down. At the same time, it is plain that, at certain 
periods and in certain places of mintage, the life of an obverse die was much 
longer than the life of a reverse. How is this to be accounted for? No 
doubt, it is not unconnected with the fact that, in the cases under consider- 
ation, the reverses have magistrates’ signatures, A change of magistrate 
would thus entail a change of die. But there must be some further reason. 
For we have examples of reverse dies which, though not identical, are yet 
similar in all essential points (Nos. 14 and 15; 17 and 18; 19 and 20; 29, 
30, and 31), showing clearly that one and the same die did not always 
suffice for the whole of a magistrate’s term of office. On the other hand, in 
Nos. 26 and 27, we have an instance of a magistrate taking over a reverse 
die from his predecessor and making it serviceable by altering the mono- 
gram. The ultimate explanation is a mechanical one. The obverse die, 
which rested on the anvil, would necessarily be the more firmly bedded of 
the two. Its fellow, which received the direct blow of the hammer, would be 
more liable to breakage. It is significant that all five coins enumerated under 
No. 21 are slightly disfigured by traces of a crack in the die of the reverse. 
The comparatively short life of the reverse die entailed a curious con- 
sequence. If it was not destined to last long, there was no special induce- 
ment to take trouble about it. Hence it often bears marks of careless 
execution. In particular, the horse in the exergue is sometimes barely 
recognisable. Dr. Imhoof-Blumer has drawn attention to similar carelessness 
on the reverses of the Pergamene regal coins,’ and Mr. Warwick Wroth 
informs me that it is common throughout the Parthian series. Ordinary 
carelessness, however, will hardly account for what we find in No. 14 as 
compared with No. 15 (PuaTE II.,3 and 4). There an obverse die is 
associated first with a normal reverse, and then with one on which the figure 
of Apollo betrays a rudeness that is almost barbarous, the magistrates’ 
signatures being in both cases the same. It is not difficult to suppose that 
the minting apparatus may sometimes have formed part of the train of a 
campaigning army. If, under such circumstances, a reverse die met -with 
one of the accidents to which we have seen that reverse dies were peculiarly 


subject, there may not always have been at hand a skilled engraver ready to 
make good the defect. 


Passing from this preliminary consideration, we must deal first with a 
question that is fundamental. Unless it can. be proved that the coins on our 


2 B.M.C. Lycaonia, etc., pp. xliv. f., foot- that engravers of inferior skill were employed 
note. to cut the reverse dies, This, of course, is in 

3 Die Miinzen der Dyn. von Pergamon, no way inconsistent with the view put forward 
p- 20. The explanation there suggested is above. ee 


ere 
Ἷ ~ c= - ow Ἀ 


EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 101 


list have a common origin, all attempts to justify a chronological arrange- 
ment will be futile. The differences underlying our arrangement are small, 
and, even though it be taken for granted that they followed one another in 
the same order of succession everywhere, it would not be fair to assume that 
the development was simultanéous at all the mints throughout the Seleucid 
Empire. Fortunately the matter is not one that gives room for difference of 
opinion. The pieces under discussion are generally attributed to Alexandria 
Troas, and, so far as the great majority of them are concerned, the correct- 
ness of the attribution is beyond dispute. All but three (Nos, 3, 33, and 
34) have a grazing horse in the exergue on the reverse. That the horse is 
in no way connected with the figure of Apollo is proved by its occurrence, 
in the same position and in an exactly similar attitude, beneath the seated 
figure of Zeus on tetradrachms of the Alexander class." As it is not con- 
nected with the type, it must be a symbol in the proper sense of the term. 
Normally, a symbol is either a mint-mark or the crest of a magistrate. In 
this case it cannot be the crest of a magistrate, inasmuch as it is found along 
with various combinations of the monograms which so obviously represent 
magistrates names. It must, therefore, be a mint-mark, and, as it is a 
reproduction in miniature of the most characteristic coin-type of Alexandria 
Troas, the conclusion is irresistible. Incidentally we can glean a little 
information as to the arrangements for supervising tlie issue of money at this 
particular city. Two monograms appear on each coin. In spite of the 
variety with which these monograms are combined, their total number is 
limited. It is clear that the magistracies attached to the mint were held 
in succession by members of the same family or families, a practice that we 
know to have been followed in other parts of the Hellenic world. Further, 
of the two magistrates who sign on each tetradrachm, one held office for a 
longer period, the other for a shorter. Thus, for example, on Nos. 24 ff. we 
have the same obverse die associated with seven different reverses. On all 
seven reverses the monogram kX or J is found, and it occurs in combination 
with at least three other monograms, no one of which can possibly conceal 
the same name as either of its companions. The inference is plain. The 
more important magistrate’s term of office was at least three times as long 
as that of his colleague. Not improbably it was a good deal longer. 

Hitherto we have been dealing only with the reverse side of the coins. 
The evidence as to community of origin is confirmed in an unusually inter- 
esting way by the obverse. In all previous discussions of these pieces it has 
been assumed that the significance of the wings on the king’s diadem was 
personal. The explanation most generally adopted is that put forward by 
Babelon, who regards the device as having been originally adopted by 
Antiochus IT. in order to bring into prominence his descent through his mother 
Stratonice, daughter of Demetrius Poliorcetes, from the royal house of Anti- 
gonus, and therefore ty ρφαγος from Perseus.'* This view I find myselt 


a Miiller, Nuwmismatique d’ Alexandre le M4 Babelon, Rois de Syrie, ete., pp. lv. f. 
Grand, Nos. 923 f. 


> 
« 
᾿ 
i ee 
- yp 
* - ~——e J -- 
'. T ¢ 
ι > 2 3 - 
ΠΥ τῳ, 5 - 
“else - ω 


102 ΟΠ GEORGE MACDONALD 


unable to accept. The wings are primarily a local mark, not a personal one: 
In other words, in Alexandria Troas and its neighbourhood the cult of the 
Seleucid monarchs was assimilated to the worship of some god or hero who 
was conventionally represented as wearing wings upon his head. The 
discovery of an inscribed stone may one day tell us who the god or hero was. 
When we have learned that, we shall be in a better position to speculate on 
the grounds that underlay the assimilation. 

This opinion as to the meaning of the wings was formed some time ago. 
It was strikingly confirmed when I lighted, in the trays of the British 
Museum, on the coin which is there classed as No. 10 of Antiochus III. Since 
this paper was begun, the piece I speak of has been published by Dr. von 
Fritze in Dorpfeld’s Z'raja wnd Ilion,” where attention is drawn to a point 
that provides conclusive proof of the correctness of the contention advanced 
above. That readers may judge for themselves, the tetradrachm just 
mentioned is here reproduced (PLATE I., 6). Side by side with it stands 
the earliest example of the winged diadem group (PLATE I, 7). A com- 
parison of the reverses shows a general similarity of type and inscription. 
The noteworthy point is that the symbol is different. Instead of a grazing 
horse in the exergue, we have in the field |. the statue of Athena Ilias, the 
familiar coin-type of Ilium, which must therefore have been the issuing mint. 
Turning to the other side, that with the head of the monarch, even the 
casual observer could not fail to notice the extraordinary resemblance between 
the two coins. Dr. von Fritze points out that both are actually from the 
same die, the wing which appears on the coin of Alexandria, having been 
added in the interval between the two strikings.!° I am able to say that Mr. 
Head and his colleagues in the British Museum concur unreservedly. At 
Ilium, therefore, wings were inappropriate. At Alexandria Troas they were 
felt to be essential. As the two towns were not very far apart, we may 
perhaps infer that the cult to which the wings bear witness, prevailed only 
within a limited area. It was not, however, restricted to Alexandria 
Troas itself. There are other marks to be accounted for. Thus on 
No. 3 (PLATE I, 9) we have a bee (?). This may be the crest of Gentinus, 
a town of which we know nothing except that it was in the Troad, and 
that it was reputed to have been founded by one of the children of 
Aeneas.!’ In the fourth century B.c. it struck bronze coins with a bee as the 
reverse type.’® If the wings could be taken as furnishing any clue to the 
site, this should be looked for in the near neighbourhood of Alexandria Troas. 
Such a situation would account for the early cessation of the autonomous 
coinage. The city would be reduced to insignificance by the new creation of 
Antigonus and Lysimachus (310-300 B.c.). Again, on Nos. 33 and 34 


1 P, 480. No. 14 (Beilage 61, 14). wing represents the second stage. For the pur- 
16 Op. cit. p. 504. Dr. von Fritze regards poses of our argument it is quite immaterial 
the wing as having been present on the die in whether it is an addition or an erasure that we 
its original form and as having been afterwards have to do with. 
erased. Mr. Head was at first inclined to take 17 Steph. Byz. 8.0. Tey 
this view, but he now agrees with me that the 18 B.M.C. Troas, etc., Pl. x. Nos. 9 ff. 


a 


EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. * 103 


(Puate II., 10), the place of the grazing horse is occupied by a round 
shield. I cannot recall any city in the Troad for which this would be a 
likely mint-mark. It may be the badge of some small town that has left 
no independent numismatic memorials. The monograms, it should be added, 
differ entirely from any found on the tetradrachms of Alexandria. There 
is still another coin on our list that calls for special notice. No. 32(PLate IL., 
9) appears to be an alliance coin. In addition to the grazing horse in the 
exergue, there is a second symbol in the field 1., probably a head of Athena, 
although the worn condition of the coin renders certainty impossible. There 
are so many cities that might have used this as a mint-mark that it is not 
worth while attempting to choose between them. 

; Community of origin being thus, I hope, satisfactorily established, we 
may now proceed to examine the proposed chronological arrangement. The 
period within which the whole series must necessarily fall is, as we shall 
see, but a brief one at the best, and the task of determining the relative 
ages of the individual pieces is correspondingly difficult. The reverse type 
remains unchanged throughout, and we are thrown back on various con- 
siderations of a more or less delicate character. Some are purely technical, 
such as the presence or absence of the border of dots, the height of the 
relief, the breadth of the flan or blank on which the coin is struck. Others 
are iconographic or epigraphic. But, whatever their nature, no one of them 
is so strong that, taken by itself, it would carry conviction. It is on the 
combination of testimony that we must rely. Hence a detailed discussion of 
the different classes becomes imperative. It shall be as concise as is con- 
sistent with clearness. 

Class I. consists of two coins. The first of these is distinguished from 
all that follow by the high reiief in which the obverse type is represented 
(PuaTE I., 7). This at once suggests that it is relatively early, a view 
that is supported by the border of dots which encloses the head. For com- 
parison with the issues of the Bithynian and Pergamene kings shows that 
we may safely regard the border as an index of chronology ; in these series it 
is found only on the money of the earlier kings. The piece that stands 
second on our list (PLATE J., 8) is unfortunately in poor condition. Not 
only is the surface worn, but the appearance of the dots that form the border, 
proves that the obverse has not been ‘cleanly’ struck to begin with. But, 
disfigured as it is, the border resembles the border of No. 1 more closely than 
that of any of the three coins placed next in order. That the magistrate ἜἝ 
signs on both No. 1 and No. 2 may be no more than a coincidence. But it 
is worth noting that he (or a namesake) signs again on No. 4, and that after- 
wards we do not find any monogram resembling his until we reach ΞΡ in 
Class VI. Finally, our grouping is confirmed by the portraits. While the 
two are utterly unlike one another, they have this feature in common, that 
neither shows any affinity to anything else in our series. If we attempted to 
_ make room for them at any point, we should interrupt what I trust may 

_ prove to be a continuous line of iconographic development. 


104 * GEORGE MACDONALD 


The two coins that compose Class II. are connected by the closest of all 
bonds. Both appear to reproduce the portrait of the same individual at 
about the same period of his life. The face on No, 4 (PLate I, 10) is a 
little fuller than that on No. 3 (PLATE I., 9). Perhaps it is slightly older, 
It should, however, be remembered that the two were struck at different 
mints. The absence of monograms, no less than the change in the symbol, 
points to some other town than Alexandria as being responsible for No. 3. 
The slightly different treatment of the wing is also worth noting. But the 
mints, though different, are not likely to have been far apart. As we 
have seen, they were in all probability nearer than Ilium and Alexandria. 
Consequently we are fairly entitled to appeal, for confirmation of our classi- 
fication, to the general similarity of style and especially to the presence of the 
border. The dots, it may be observed, are rather larger and rather more 
widely separated than was the case in the preceding Class. 

Class III. can be readily disposed of. It contains only a single coin 
(PuatE 1., 11). .The border of dots, which still lingers, though in a slightly 
changed form, gives it priority over all that come after it in our list. At the 
same time, the portrait seems to present us with the fully matured head of 
the youth whose coins we placed in Class II. The most promineut features 
are the long nose and the pointed chin, the latter now exhibiting a decided 
tendency to become double. . 

Class IV. contains two parallel subdivisions, each represented by two 
different obverse dies. Beginning with IV. A, we shall hardly require to 
defend the collocation of No. 6 (PLATE I., 12) and Nos. 7 ff. (PLATE L., 
13). A reference to the Plate will show not merely a general similarity of 
style, but a close resemblance in points of detail. The ends of the diadem, 
for example, are treated in the same way on both obverse dies ; so too is the 
hair, more especially the locks that cluster over the forehead; there is no 
border. The portrait can, I think, be connected with Classes II. and III. 
The face, no doubt, is represented as thinned by age; but the nose is un- 
changed, and the chin, if it is no longer double, is still brought forward to a 
point. Turning next to IV. B, the two obverses in which are almost exactly 
alike, we find that the portrait is in striking contrast to the head we have 
seen on the coins of IV. A. We are now in the presence not of a middle- 
aged or an elderly man, but of a mere boy (PLATE II., 1). And yet technical 
and stylistic considerations force us to conclude that the coins are contempor- 
aneous. Thus, the diadem is handled in the same fashion in both sets. 
Again, alike on No. 8 (where we have the elderly head) and on No. 10 (where 
we have the boy), the graziug horse of the reverse stands upon a line which 
represents the ground—a refinement that occurs on no other die throughout 
the whole list. Further, all the reverses, whether of IV. A or of IV. B, are 
flat, no concavity to speak of being apparent. In view of what we have 
learned as to the family character of the magistracy of the mint, too much 
importance is not to be attached to the monograms. But it should at least 
be mentioned that each of the six reverse dies involved bears one or other of 
three forms of the same name, «C, Df, or Κζ, I have reserved to the last. 


νι... " — τιν ῦῖ-΄. 
7 oo - 


EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 105 


the most convincing proof of homogeneity. Numismatists are familiar with 
the phenomenon of the bevelled edge, which occasionally makes its appear- 
ance in certain series. The tetradrachms of some of the Bithynian kings 
provide a conspicuous example. Mr. Hill has pointed out to me that this 
bevelling must be a direct result of the shape of the mould in which the flan 
or blank was originally cast: it is clear that the bevelled portion has remained 
untouched by the die, because type and legend invariably disappear when it 
is reached. What the ultimate motive may have been it is impossible to say, 
The important point to notice now is that, on the winged diadem coins, the 
phenomenon is characteristic of Class IV. and of Class IV. alone.!® To this 
is due the large proportion of incomplete and doubtful monograms it contains. 
No trace of a bevel is visible on the casts of No. 6 or of the Paris specimen 
of No. 8. But on all the other six coins in the Class it is quite unmistakable 
both on obverse and on reverse. And I think the exceptions are only 
apparent. In both cases the originals are somewhat worn, but the flat 
reverses and the doubtful monograms point to the same form of flan. The 
whole Class appears to have been struck at a time when a peculiar variety of 
casting mould was in use at Alexandria Troas, 

Throughout Class IV the coins tend to assume the thin, spread shape 
that we are accustomed to associate with the later tetradrachms of Asia . 
Minor. The greatest diameter of No. 7 for instance, is as much as 14 inches. 
In Class V the tendency becomes strongly marked, and is accompanied by a 
decided increase in the concavity of the reverse. The similarity of fabric is 
useful as confirmatory evidence, but the real motive for the grouping adopted 
lies in the portraits. On Nos, 13 and 14 (PLate II, 3 and 4) we can 
recognise, in spite of the inferior execution, the boy whom we have already 
met-with on No. 10 (Plate II., 1). Though the face is somewhat older, it is 
still that of a lad in his teens. On No. 12 (PLATE 11., 2), on the other hand, 
we may trace through a thin veil of idealisation the features that figured on 
Nos. 7 ff. (PLATE 1., 13). The gods have given back youth to the middle- 
aged man of the earlier coins, just as at a later period they gave it back to 
Antiochus Epiphanes.” 

In Class VI the same process of idealising is carried a stage further. 
The double chin, so distinctly marked on some of the examples (¢.g. PLATE 
IL, 5), shows that it is the head of Class III., rather than that of Class 
LV. A, that has been taken as a model. The illustrations on PLATE II. are 
fully representative, and remove all need for hesitation about assigning the 
coins they depict to one and the same period; the strong resemblance 
between the portraits renders doubt impossible. In fabric the pieces that 
compose Class VI. exhibit a slight reaction from those that preceded them. 


1% A very slight tendency towards the same edge round a cousiderable part of the circum- 
thing is noticeable in the Tobin Bush specimen ference. But the appearance presented is quite 
of No. 21, which has also a flat reverse>_ Else- different from the regular bevel of Class LV. 
where I can detect no trace of anything of the 30 Compare, for example, in B.M.C. 
_sort. Some of the obverses in Class VI.,¢.g. Seleucid Kings, Pl. xi, the head on No. 7 
Nos. 26, 27, and 28, fall away suddenly at the with that on No. 1. iad 


106 GEORGE MACDONALD. 


Indeed, the diminution in the spread of the fan might have tempted us to 
alter the sequence, were it not for two weighty considerations. The first has 
been already alluded to,—the more decided fashion in which the idealising 
of the portrait-head has been carried out. The second is of a different 
character, but is at least equally important. The technique of the legends 
indicates that the place of Class VI. is at the end of the series. Thus there 
are signs of the disappearance of firmness of line on one or two dies notably 
on No. 17 (B.ILC. Seleucid Kings, Pl. v. 2), where the letters show a tend- 
ency to terminate in dots. Most significant, however, is the substitution of ὦ 
for Q on No. 30 and on No. 31 (PLATE 11., 8). This is a matter to which 
we shall have occasion to return, 

Still confining ourselves strictly to the evidence furnished by the coins 
themselves, we have now to ask how long a period may be supposed to have 
elapsed between the issue of No. 1 and the issue of No. 34. The changes in 
style and fabric have been considerable. We have seen the dotted border 
pass through one or two different phases, and then disappear. We have seen 
the flan broaden out, and then contract. We have encountered a short space 
during which the fashion of the bevelled edge prevailed. Lastly, the differ- 
ence between the obverse of No. 1 and the obverses of, say, Nos. 32 and 33 
(PLaTE IIL, 9 and 10) is so well defined as to be explicable only on the 
supposition that there is a fairly long interval between them. The same 
conclusion follows from a comparison of the portraits. First come two that’ 
stand by themselves and apart. Next we find a lad who grows to manhood, 
reaches middle-age, then renews his youth and shines with a preternatural 
beauty that points to deification. At his side, and just at the moment when 
the relative ages suggest the connection of father and son, we catch a passing 
glimpse of the figure of a boy. I do not think any numismatist will regard 
as other than modest the proposal that we should allow about fifty years for 
this process of transformation,—technical, stylistic, iconographic. 


If we have succeeded, as I trust we may have done, in laying a secure 
chronological foundation, we are at liberty to turn to the literary records and 
enquire how far these and the numismatic memorials can be brought into 
correspondence. And, first, how does the literary evidence bear on our 
assumption that at intervals during a period of fifty years coins with the 
image and superscription of a ‘king’ Antiochus were struck at Alexandria 
Troas? The first monarch of the name succeeded to the throne in 281 B.c. 
At least as early as 289, and possibly even in 293, he had received from his 
father a share in the empire along with the title of βασιλεύς. Till the 
death of Seleucus, however, the direct authority of Antiochus appears to 
have been limited to the Eastern provinces. It was only beyond the 
Euphrates that his writ would run. All the coins that can safely be attri- 


"1 Cf. Plutarch, Demetrius, 38 ad jfin., and i. 2450. I take this opportunity of acknow- 
Appian, Syr. 59-61, with the data furnished _ ledging once for all my obligations to Wilcken’s 
by the cuneiform inscriptions of Babylon. See admirable articles on the early Antiochi. 
Wilcken in Pauly-Wissowa’s Real-Eneyclopddie, 


ἢ. 
U 


EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 107 


buted to the period of joint rule are of oriental origin. Hence the possible 


terminus a quo for Alexandria Troas must be fixed at 281 B.c. When 
Antiochus I. fell in battle after a reign of twenty years, he was directly 
followed by a son who was called by the same name as himself. Antiochus 
IL. died in 246 B.c. ITis legitimate successor was his eldest son, Seleucus IL., 
and here it would seem for a moment as if our chain were broken. History, 
however, tells also of a younger son, Antiochus, surnamed Hierax, a mere 


_ boy, who, with the support of influential partisans, declined to accept the 


authority of his brother and claimed to be recognised as sovereign of Asia 
Minor, a recognition that was actually extended to him by Seleucus when he 
found his own position seriously menaced by the pressure of a war with 
Egypt. Once that pressure was removed, hostilities broke out between the 
two brothers. The struggle continued during the greater part of the reign 
of Seleucus. It cannot be said to have ended until 227 B.c. when its last 
embers were extinguished in the blood of Hierax. But, for all practical 
purposes, it was really over two years earlier when the pretender was ex- 
pelled from the territories that had from the outset been his stronghold. 


- These territories were in the extreme west of Asia Minor. Of their extent 


the coins may have something to tell us. The important point for our 
present purpose is that the year thus reached, 229 B.c., is the Jatest terminus 
ad quem that is historically possible. The evidence for this demands closer 
examination. 

Our knowledge of the story of Hierax is fragmentary and confused. But 
one fact looms through the mists of obscurity in which the drama is shrouded. 
In its closing scenes a prominent part was played by Attalus of Pergamum 
who allied himself with Seleucus. There is every reason to suppose that his 
services were rewarded by the acknowledgement of his sovereignty over some 
of the districts where Hierax had held sway. It is, at all events, certain 
that Alexandria Troas had passed under his influence before the accession 
of Antiochus III. in 222 B.c. That this was so we learn from a chance 
reference in Polybius. Seleucus Il. did not long survive Hierax. His 
son and successor, Seleucus III., was assassinated at the outset of a campaign 
the object of which was to recover from Attalus the hereditary domains of 


_ the Seleucid kings on the shores of the Aegean. Antiochus III., who 


followed Seleucus III., entrusted to his cousin Achaeus the conduct. of the 
enterprise on the threshold of which his brother had fallen. Achaeus was so 
successful that he assumed the title of βασιλεύς and turned his arms against 
his master. Antiochus thereupon joined hands with Attalus, and between 
them the usurper was crushed. Now, in his narrative of the events thus 
summarized, Polybius (v. 78) expressly mentions three cities which had 
never swerved in their loyalty to the Pergamene King. These three were 


— Lampsacus, Alexandria Troas, and Ilium ,—lying all of them in the very 
’ EN sin to which the coins will be found to point as the centre of the power of 


Tax. As to what happened ε after the death of Achaeus, there is no clear 
All the ‘old Epa however, are in | favour of peeling that 


108 GEORGE MACDONALD 


accordingly remained attached to the kingdom of Pergamum until the death 
of Attalus in 197 B.c., when for a few brief years the Seleucid power was 
again paramount in western Asia Minor. 

This sketch will have made it plain that there were two periods during 
which the sovereignty of princes named Antiochus might have been acknow- 
ledged in Alexandria Troas—the half-century that elapsed from the accession 
of Antiochus I. to the expulsion of Hierax, and the few years that immediately 
preceded the battle of Magnesia,4* We cannot hesitate between these in 
choosing a framework for our coins. The first is of precisely the right length, 
while at the same time it may be expected to supply a sufficient number of 
historical personages to enable us to account for the variety of heads that 
appear. ΑΒ the middle part of it coincides with the reign of Antiochus II. 
it is practically certain that we shall find that. monarch figuring in our 
picture gallery. It therefore becomes important to try and discover some 
‘standard portrait’ of him by which our impressions may be tested. The 
task is not so hopeless as it might seem. In his Seleucid Kings Professor 
Gardner ascribed to Hierax a gold stater of the ordinary Seleucid type which 
had been acquired by the British Museum after the main part of his catalogue 
had been printed.”” Four other pieces, more or Jess similar, now lie beside 
it in the trays, which also contain no. fewer than nine gold staters of 
Antiochus I., as against one which appears in Prof. Gardner’s Appendix.” 
Of these fourteen coins, thirteen are known to have been brought at different 
times from Northern India or Afghanistan. That the fourteenth came from 
the same quarter is rendered highly probable by the fact that. it was pre- 
sented along with several Indian coins. In 1881, when the provenance of 
these staters became apparent, Prof. Gardner saw that it was impossible to 
believe that they had been struck by Hierax, whose authority never extended 
beyond Asia Minor. He therefore withdrew his original attribution, and 
proposed instead to assign them to Antiochus III.% In this he has been 
followed by M. Babelon.”® I think it can be shown that they belong to 
Antiochus II. One of them is here reproduced (PLATE I, 3), and along 
with it one of the corresponding gold pieces of Antiochus I. (PLaTE 1., 2). 
There is, at the outset, a serious iconographic difficulty in the way of the 
attribution to Antiochus III. The head is quite youthful, while Antiochus 
was more than thirty years of age when he reconquered the far Eastern pro- 
vinces that had been lost in the reign of his grandfather. But the main 
objection rests on the surer ground of style and fabric. ἃ careful examina- 
tion of the fourteen specimens in the British Museum has convinced me that 


*la Alexandria Troas was, of course, one of * Tt is worth adding that there is a specimen 


the three cities whose resistance to the claims 
of Antiochus directly occasioned the interven- 
tion of Rome (Livy, xxxv. 42). That it ul- 
timately fell into his power, seems probable 
(see Drakenborch’s note on Livy xxxvii. 35, 
§ 2). 

2 Op. cit. p. 110, 1; Pl. xxviii. 10. 

23 Op. cit. p. 108, 1; Pl. xxviii. la. 


of each class of stater in the Bodleian Collection, 
the provenance being similar to that of the 
B.M. coins. In his arrangement, Prof. Oman 
has (rightly as we shall see) assigned the 
‘ Hierax’ head to Antiochus 11. 

°° Num. Chron, 1881, p. 11. 

36. Rois de Syrie, etc., p. 1xxx. 


EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 109 


they are all the product of one mint and that they all belong to practically 
the same period, that is, to the last years of Antiochus I. and the early years 
of Antiochus II. before the revolts of Parthia and Bactria. Feeling that my 
personal opinion on such a nice question could carry little weight, I put the 
point before Mr. Head. After an examination of the pieces concerned, he 
permits me to say that he has no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that 
the whole were struck at one mint, and that the earliest and the latest can- 
not be separated by a longer interval than five-and-twenty years at the 
outside. His judgment, he adds, has been formed solely on numismatic 
grounds and without any reference to the portraits. This authoritative 
opinion makes Antiochus III. a8 impossible as Hierax, and fully entitles us 
to claim PLATE I., 3 as a certain portrait of Antiochus IT. 

The evidence of the gold coins can be supplemented in a way that will 
enable us to restore to their rightful owner a good many silver coins that 
have long been mis-attributed. On PLATE L, 5 will be found a character- 
istic specimen of a head that is usually described either as Hierax or as 
Antiochus IIT. The original is in the Hunter Cabinet. Alongside of it is 
placed (PLate I, 4) a reproduction of a British Museum coin,” which 
bears a striking portrait of Antiochus I. The close resemblance between the 
reverses is very remarkable. The monograms in the exergue are the same. 
On both coins the figure of Apollo is represented as wearing bvots, a pecu- 
. liarity I do not remember to have noticed anywhere except on these and one 
or two similar pieces. Here again I appealed to Mr. Head, and here again I 
I am allowed to say that he confirms the opinion I had been led to form: the 


case is precisely parallel to that of the gold staters. We have thus provided 


ourselves with two portraits of Antiochus II., which we may safely use as aids 
in attempting to identify the winged heads. But a word of caution is 
required. The gold coins came, as we have seen, from the extreme East. I 
have no evidence as to the provenance of the silver pieces. Their fabric, 
however, is not that of Asia Minor. In comparing our portraits with those 
engraved at Alexandria Troas, we must, therefore, bear in mind the wide 
distance that separated the places of issue, and must refrain from insisting 
on too close a resemblance.” 
If we apply our test pieces to Class I., we shall, I think, be compelled to 
admit that Antiochus II. is impossible alike for No. 1 and for No. 2. Whom 
then are we to suppose that they represent? Worn and disfigured as it is, 
No, 2 (Pare I., 8) can be disposed of more readily than its companion. 
There need not be much hesitation in recognising on it the features 
of Antiochus I. Iconographically, no other solution seems open to us. 


» % Gardner, Seleweid Kings, p. 9, No. 19. two heads of Nero reproduced in B.M.C., 
* Differences of this sort between the pro- @alatia, etc., Pl. xxi. Nos. 5 and 9. Some 
duets of ἃ mints are familiar to numis- interesting remarks by Botho Graef on the 


* Salita. ‘It could not have been otherwise, limitations of the die-cutters will be found in 
especially if a -Teign were long. Even coins Jahrbuch des Kaiserl. deutsch. archaeol. In- 
at the same mint sometimes present  stifués, xvii. p. 72. 


110 GEORGE MACDONALD 


Historically, the identification is not only possible but probable. The relations 
that subsisted between this monarch and the cities of the Troad were excep- 
tionally cordial, as we learn from the so-called ‘Sigean’ inscription, now in 
the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge.” There remains the head on 
No. 1. This appears to be quite unlike any portrait to be met with else- 
where throughout the Seleucid series. It bears even less resemblance to 
Antiochus I. or to Antiochus III. than it does to Antiochus II. Dr. von 
Fritze, feeling the difficulty, has assigned it to Antiochus Hierax.®® Such an 
attribution, however, if accepted, would involve the immediate abandonment 
of the chronological arrangement which we have been at such pains to build 
up. Besides, as we shall see, Hierax is otherwise provided for. A possible 
way out of the dilemma is to suggest that the head may be that of a little 
known member of the royal house, Seleucus, the elder son of Antiochus I. 
Of this prince historians tell us hardly anything save that he was put to 
death by his father on suspicion of treachery.*! It is possible that he is 
mentioned as βασιλεύς, along with his father, on another inscription from 
the Troad.*? At all events, it is certain—the cuneiform records of Babylon 
prove it—that he enjoyed the dignity and title at least from 275 to 269 8.0.3 


In 266 his place beside his father on the Babylonian inscriptions is taken by’ 


his younger brother Antiochus. The time of his death can, therefore, be 
fixed within very narrow limits, and this in turn helps us to date our coin, 
provided our conjecture as to the identity of the portrait be regarded as 
worthy of acceptance. Let us look at it more closely. 

There is no prima facie reason against it. Enjoying the position he did, 
the ill-fated prince might well have left some mark upon the currency; his 


father had struck coins as βασιλεύς while Seleucus Nikator was still alive. | 


But an obvious objection suggests itself at once, Would it not be strange 
to find a coin with the portrait of a Seleucus on the one side and the name 
of an Antiochus on the other? An answer can best be given through the 
unpublished tetradrachm from the Hunter Collection which is reproduced on 
Puate I, 1. On the obverse is a singularly fine portrait of Seleucus 
Nikator; on the reverse is the head of a horned horse with the legend 
ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ANTIOXOY.% ‘True, the parallel is not perfect ; the positions 
of father and son are reversed. But this, so far from being a difficulty, is just 
what we might look for in the circumstances. The Hunter tetradrachm is 
one of a group of pieces struck, during the period of the joint reign, for circu- 
lation in the Eastern provinces where Antiochus held special authority as 
viceroy. It is, therefore, only natural that it should bear his name. On the 


* Hicks', No. 165 (pp. 279 ff.)=Ditten- 
berger', No. 156 (pp. 288 ff.). 

3 Troja und Ilion, pp. 503 f. 

31 Johan. Ant. (Fragm. Hist. Graec. iv. 
558, 55). 

% Dittenberger!, No. 157, 1. 11 (p. 242). 
This is Wilcken’s view (Pauly-Wissowa, i. 
2464). Dittenberger (/.c.) considers that the 


reference is to Seleucus Nikator. 

88. Zeitschr. fiir Assyr. vii. 234, 226, viii. 
108. Keilschr. Biblioth. iii. 2, 136. 

34. The corresponding drachm will be found 
described in Imhoof-Blumer, Monn. grecg. 
Ρ. 424, No. 16, the monograms being 
different. rite 


EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 111 


other hand, there is no reason to suppose that the young Seleucus ever 
exercised any special jurisdiction in the Troad. Regal coins issued at Ilium 
and Alexandria would thus, as a matter of course, be minted in the name of 
his father. If the portrait be that of the son, it must have been placed upon 
the coin because some particular occasion for doing honour to the lad had 
arisen, such an occasion as would be afforded, for instance, by his original 
elevation to the dignity of βασιλεύς. That there would be nothing very 
unusual in a proceeding of the kind, we may perhaps learn from the tetra- 
drachms that form Class II. 

Babelon and Six have followed Mionnet in identifying the head which is . 
there represented (PLATE I., 9 and 10) as that of Hierax.* I believe it to 
be the head of Antiochus II. On various grounds we were led to place it very 
early in our series. If we assign it to Hierax, we must attribute to him all 
the coins that follow, variety of portraiture notwithstanding. Further, if we 
apply our test pieces, we shall, I think, find a considerable resemblance 
between, say, PLATE I., 5 and Puate I., 9. The resemblance is, indeed, 
striking if we have regard to the wide distance between East and West. It 
is true that the latter represents a considerably younger face than the former. 
And this brings us to the immediate point. If the coins in Class II. repre- 
sent the second Antiochus, they must have been struck during his father’s 
lifetime. For, according to Eusebius (Chron. I. 251), he was forty years old 
when he died in 246 B.c., and he must therefore have been twenty-four when 
he succeeded Antiochus Soter in 261 B.c. We may note that this latter age 
accords perfectly with the appearance he presents on the coins struck at the 
very beginning of his reign (PLATE I., 3 and 5). The head on our Class II., 
on the other hand, is that of a youth some seven or eight years younger. 
Here again, then, we have a case where.elevation to the dignity of βασιλεύς 
may have provided the occasion for a special issue. The death of Seleucus 
and the promotion of Antiochus occurred, as we saw above, between 269 and 
266 B.c., that is, after Antiochus was seventeen and before he was twenty. 
The search for further parallels may justify a brief digression, especially as 
this will enable us to draw attention to a current attribution that calls for 
correction. 

Numismatists and collectors are familiar with the tetradrachms that 
have on the obverse a childish head within a fillet border, and on the reverse 
the ordinary seated Apollo with the legend ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ANTIOXOY (PLATE 
II.,12). Since Droysen’s time these have been generally classed as belonging to 
‘ Antiochus, son of Seleucus III.’ This classification can no longer be main- 
tained. Wilcken has shown conclusively that ‘ Antiochus, son of Seleucus ITI.’ 
is a phantom.** His existence was inferred by Droysen from an inscription 
of Seleucia Pieria, which contains a list of Seleucidae to whom divine 


heh Ye a were paid.’ The list includes ‘ Σελεύκου Σωτῆρος καὶ ᾿Αντιόχου 


- ἘΞ - 
. - 


; % Babelon, Rois de Syrie, p. 88, No. 284; 86 Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. I. 2470. 
Ὶ oF honed 1898, p. 234, No. 2; 37 O.1,G. iii, 4458. 


112 GEORGE MACDONALD 


καὶ Αντιόχου Μεγάλου. By way of accounting for the seemingly superfluous 
βασιλεύς, it was supposed that Seleucus III. had had a young son, called 
Antiochus, who was proclaimed king on his father’s death, but was speedily 
set aside in favour of his masterful uncle, Antiochus IIL** This theory 
was received almost without question until lately when the real explana- 
tion was furnished by a similar inscription discovered at Magnesia on the 
Maeander.*” In the corresponding portion of the list the names are 
given as "βασιλέως Σελεύκου καὶ βασιλέως ᾿Αντιόχου καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ 
βασιλέως ᾿Αντιόχου᾽ Without a doubt the reference is the same in 
both cases, the person meant being Antiochus, eldest son of Antiochus 
ITI., whose death in 193 B.c. is recorded by Livy (xxxv. 15), and who, as we 
know from cuneiform inscriptions,” held rank as βασιλεύς for many years. 
The fact that he predeceased his father readily accounts for his position in 
the inscription of Seleucia. 

The supposed son of Seleucus III. having disappeared from history, it is 
natural to ask what is to be done with the money that has so long lain at his 
credit. Has the prince who ousted him any right to be heard as a claimant ? 
According to Polybius (v. 55) this young Antiochus was born on the eve of 
his father’s expedition against Artabazanes, that is, in the year 220 B.c. He 
would thus be 27 at the date of his death, so that, if the coins belong to him, 
they must have been struck a very long time before. That they were all 
issued about the same period must be obvious to any one who knows them. 
How would the facts of the case be met by such an hypothesis as that 
suggested to account for the possible appearance of Seleucus, son of 
Antiochus I., on coins of Ilium and Alexandria Troas? In 212 B.c. the 
cuneiform inscriptions mention Antiochus III. as sole king. For four years 
there is a gap in our documents and then, in 208, we find his son Antiochus 
associated with him as βασιλεύς. In this latter year the prince would be a 
boy of twelve, decidedly too old for the almost infantile features that the 
coins display. Doubtless it might be argued that the title was bestowed 
upon him somewhat earlier. His father set out on his great expedition to 
the East not later than 209 B.c. Preparations must have begun long before. 
A prospective absence of several years from the seat of government would 
have to be provided for, and it is very probable that the proclamation of the 
king’s eldest son as βασιλεύς was one of the precautions taken. Such a 
ceremony, we may be sure, would be carried through with all pomp and 
circumstance. It is tempting to suppose that it included the issue of a series 
of coins which would carry the likeness of the new regent into the remotest 
corners of the kingdom, and which would, by a happy accident, be able to 
carry his name also. without his father’s rights being in any way infringed. 
The chief objection to this view, and it is so serious as to be almost a fatal 
one, is the extremely childish character of the head.*! On this and other 


38 ΠΕ ΞΕ Hellenismus. iii, 2, 121 ff, 40. Zeitschrift fiir Assyr. viii. 109. 
133 ft. 41 This is very properly emphasised by Mr. 
39 Otto Kern, Die Inschriften von Magnesia E.R. Bevan in his House of Seleucus, which 
am Maeander, No. 61. -was published while this paper was in progress. 


KARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 113 
grounds I incline to favour an alternative solution, which will still provide us 
with the parallel for which we are in search. 

The youngest βασιλεύς of the Seleucid line was, so far as our information 
goes, Antiochus V. (Eupator). According to Appian (Sy. 46, 66) he was nine 
when his father died, that is, in 164 B.c. He must, therefore, have been born 
in 173. Cuneiform records show that he had received the title of βασιλεύς 
as early as 170.2 Three would suit admirably for the age of the child upon 
the coins, and all difficulties would vanish if we could suppose that Epiphanes, 
when he had his son proclaimed joint-ruler, had ordered the issue of a special 
series of tetradrachms to commemorate the occasion. - A systematic and care- 
ful examination of all known specimens would probably lead to a definite and 
certain conclusion. A survey of the material at present at my disposal 
(London, Paris, Hunter) has shown that there are distinct indications of an 
affinity between the pieces we are discussing and the earlier coinage of 
Antiochus Epiphanes. 

Returning to the winged diadem series, we find that our task has 
become comparatively simple. In our discussion of the chronological arrange- 
ment, it was pointed out that the youthful head which appears in Class IT., 
is identical with that which is found, at more advanced stages of develop- 
ment, in Classes III., 1V.a, V.A, and VI. If then Class II. be attributed to 
Antiochus IL., it is to him also that the great bulk of the remaining pieces in 
our list must be given. This result tallies with the ordinarily accepted view. 
But in the application there is an important difference. While the solitary 
tetradrachm in Class III. may well have been struck during the king’s life- 
time, the whole of the rest were probably issued after his death. They form, 
in fact, part of the coinage of Antiochus Hierax and his supporters. The 
suggestion that this might be so was put forward by the late Dr. J. P. Six,® 
who saw in it a possible explanation of the idealisation of the royal portrait, a 
characteristic first pointed out by Bunbury.“# As my own conclusion was 
reached independently, it will be worth while trying to justify it. 

Antiochus II. is known to have treated the Greek cities of Asia Minor 
with exceptional liberality. Hence, indeed, his title of Theos. This policy 
was forced upon him by the necessity of securing their support against 
Ptolemaic aggression, But the lustre that it threw round his memory was 
none the less bright and abiding. If it still lingered when he had been dead 
for a century, it must have been brilliant indeed in the years immediately 
after he had passed away. In such circumstances we can well imagine that, 
just as (to take a single instance) the kings of Pergamum for generations 


The suggestion there made (vol. ii. p. 125) 
appears, however, to involve difficulties: no less 
serious. We do not know how old the son of 
Seleucus Philopator was when his father died, 
we do not know whether his name was 
Antiochus, and there is no evidence that he 


| fie dsoyr. viii. 110. ᾿- 
© Num. Chron. 1898, pp. 234 f. We saw 
Εν ΥΟΙ͂, τος 
= 


above that in his Supplement Mionnet, follow- 
ing Visconti, assigned all the winged diadem 
coins to Hierax. But he did so in the belief 
that the head was the head of Hierax. Dr. 
Six’s view, of course, is quite different. 

4 Num. Chron, 1883, p. 80. 

45. See E. R. Bevan, Howse of Seleucus, i, 
p- 176, with references there. 


114 GEORGE MACDONALD 


placed upon their coins the divinized head of the founder of their dynasty, 
so the friends of Hierax—he was too young to act for himself—may have 
chosen as a type the portrait of the monarch whose position they were 
anxious that their protégé should fill. Can such ὦ priori reasoning be sup- 
ported by any direct evidence drawn from the coins themselves? It may be 
pointed out, to begin with, that our hypothesis explains in the most natural 
way possible the appearance of the boyish head in Classes IV. B and V. B, 
the former of which we saw to be some years earlier than the latter. These, 
along with IV. A and V. A, were struck soon after the death of Antiochus IL, an 
event which took place when Hierax was a boy of about 8.4° Class VI., which 
supplies both the greatest variety of dies and much the largest number of indi- 
vidual specimens, was minted a good deal later, apparently at some point in the 
struggle when the fortunes of Hierax were in the ascendant, or at least when 
he had no lack of bullion at his disposal. From the outset the father’s head 
was used as a type, but that of the son was at first also employed. On the 
last issues the former alone is found. The portrait on PLATE IL. 1, 3, and 4 
will then be that of Hierax, and the coins concerned thus acquire a fresh 
interest. Through them, it may be possible to identify other portraits of 
him struck at different mints.“* For we are not entitled to assume that 
Alexandria Troas was the only place where he issued money. Returning now 
to the points on which our chronological arrangement was based, we may 
enquire whether any of these can be made to furnish a direct indication of 
the date of any of our Classes. | 
That the winged diadem series extends over a considerable period, we 
have already seen. Further, Class III., which presents on the obverse a fully 
matured head of Antiochus II. within a border of dots (PLATE I., 11), 
must be separatea by an interval of some years from Class IV. A, where the 
portrait is markedly older and where the border of dots has disappeared 
(PLATE I., 13). As Antiochus II. was only forty when he died, these 
latter coins bring us at least to the very end of his reign; they may well 
have been struck after his death. The disappearance of the border of dots is 
entirely in favour of the same period. This is a matter in regard to which 
mathematical precision is impossible. But it is interesting to see what hap- 
pened at neighbouring mints. The familiar Seleucid tetradrachms which 
have the seated Herakles as a reverse type,—a series that would probably 
repay special study,—are attributed by common consent to Antiochus II. 
Presumably they were issued during his lifetime; the portrait is usually quite 


46 According to Justin (27, 2,7) he was 14 
in 238 or 237 B.c. I need hardly point out 
that the portrait on Plate II. 1 tallies exactly, so 
far as age is concerned, with the theory that 
it represents Hierax as he was when his father 
died. 

4a The great majority of the identifications 
hitherto suggested are demonstrably wrong. 
We have already seen (p. 108 f.) that two sets of 
coins often given to Hierax really belong to 


Antiochus II. Similarly, the head figured by 
M. Th. Reinach in L’ Histoire par les Monnaies, 
Ρ. 181, is a youthful portrait of Antiochus III. 
Much is often made of a supposed resemblance 
to Seleucus II. It seems to be forgotten that 
family likenesses are at least as apt to run 
perpendicularly as to run horizontally; if 
Antiochus Hierax was the brother of Seleucus 
II., Antiochus II. was his father and Antiochus 
III. his son. © ° 


EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS. 115 


realistic. 
Now on all of these, so far as my observation goes, the king’s portrait is 
enclosed by a border of dots, Again, in the coinage of the kings of Bithynia, 
the dotted border is present on the tetradrachms and drachms of Nicomedes L., 
who died circa 250 B.c., but it is absent on those of Prusias I., the next of the 
line who issued silver money (circa 228-180 B.c.). Once more, on the regal 
series of Pontus, which begins with Mithradates IV. (circa 250-190 B.C.) it is 


They were struck at different cities throughout Ionia and Aeolis.‘” 


not found at all. The whole trend of the evidence would lead us to believe 


- that in the north and west of Asia Minor the border of dots fell out of fashion 


about the middle of the second century B.c., though hardly during the lifetime 
of Antiochus II. There is one important exception. According to Dr, Imhoof- 
Blumer’s arrangement, it survived at Pergamum well into the reign of 
Eumenes 11. (197-159 Β.0.).. Such a survival could be easily accounted for ; 
the type had long been a conventional one, and association with it would 
tend to prolong the use of the border.‘ At Alexandria Troas, on the other 
hand, the adherents of Hierax were making a new departure, and they would 
be free to dispense with an ornament that was being abandoned elsewhere. 
From every point of view circa 245 b.c. would suit admirably for Class IV. 
Class VI. admits, I think, of being dated more precisely. It will be 
recollected that one of our reasons for placing it last in order of time was 
the occurrence of W for Q on two of the dies. In publishing No. 31, Leake 
long ago remarked upon it as a very early example of the late form of the 
omega.” As a matter of fact, Ὁ does not seem to occur in Attic inscriptions 
before 168 B.c.°° It does not become common there until the Christian 
era. Authorities agree in stating that it originated in Egypt and passed 
from there to Sicily and to Asia. Reinach gives circa 230 B.c. as the 
date of its first appearance on metal in the land of its origin! If we 
may take this indication as a guide, we are bound to conclude that 
our coin-dies cannot possibly have been engraved during the lifetime 
of Antiochus II. They must be assigned to the last portion of the 
‘reign’ of Hierax, which came to an end, as we saw, in 229 B.c. In this 
connection it is well to remember that, during at least a part of his career 


he was on terms of friendly alliance with the Egyptian garrisons in- the 


cities of the coast,®? and presumably therefore with the court of Ptolemy. 


- ΒΒ, Reinach, Traité de l'épigraph. σγέοῃ. 


47 Imhoof-Blumer, Monn. grecq., p. 426. 

48 While this is so, I confess that the one 
point that has caused me difficulty in Imhoof’s 
arrangement, has always been the extraordin- 
arily small allowance that it makes for the 
long reign of Attalus I. (241—197 B.c.). With 
characteristic frankness Dr. Imhoof has him- 
self drawn particular attention to the deficiency 
(Die Miinzen der Dyn. von Perg. p. 27). 

4 Num. Hellen, p. 23. 

9 0.7.4, 115, 968. See Larfeld in“Iwan- 
Miiller’s Handbuch (Hilfs-disziplinen® p. 536). 


Graecae, p. 232. Reinach well points out that 
cursive forms naturally come into use in metal 
sooner than in lapidary inscriptions, 

52 Euseb. Chron. I. 251 (Ptolemaci auwiliés 
fretus proelium felici Marte conseruit), A few 
lines earlier Ptolemy is spoken of as if he 
had been a supporter of Hierax, or at least an 
opponent of Seleucus II., in the first stages of 
the civil war. These references will suffice 
to make good my point without entering on 
the vexed question discussed by Beloch, Histor, 
Zeitschr. 1888, p. 501, and Wilcken in Pauly- 
Wissowa’s Real-Encycl. i, 2459. 


12 


116 EARLY SELEUCID ΡΟΝΤΈΑΤΤΕ. 


One final matter remains to be dealt with—the question of locality. 


The coin figured on PLATE IT., 11 belongs to a group which must also form - 


part of the mintage of Hierax. But for the absence of wings on the diadem, 
the head is an exact counterpart of that which is found on our Class VI. 
These pieces are not very common. So far as I have noted, all of them 
have on the reverse one or more of the following symbols—a long torch, the 
forepart of Pegasos, an eagle with wings closed,—which we may regard as 
the mint-marks respectively of Cyzicus, of Lampsacus, and of Abydus. 
Taken in conjunction with the tetradrachms struck at Alexandria Troas, they 
give us a fair idea of the ‘sphere of influence’ which Hierax dominated 
before 229 B.c. The numismatic evidence, however, points clearly to Alex- 
andria as the centre of gravity both at this period and also in 245. How 
far does that accord with the literary testimony ? Modern historians have 
nothing to tell us of any special bond between Hierax and Alexandria. We 
read, however, of a certain Alexander, brother of his mother Laodice, who 
was the chief supporter of the pretender when hostilities broke out with 
Selencus II. The sole authority for the existence of this Alexander is the 
following passage from Eusebius as given in Miller's Fragm. Hist. Graee. : 
‘Verum tamen vivente adhuc Callinico Seleuco, Antiochus, minor natu frater, 
quietis sortisque suae impatiens, adjutorem favitoremque nactus est Alexandrum, 
qui et urbem Sardes tenebat et Laodices matris suae frater erat. It is hardly 
necessary to say that for our knowledge of this portion of Eusebius we are 
entirely dependent upon an Armenian version. Now, if we turn to the 
same passage in Schoene’s edition (i. 251), we find the crucial words thus 
rendered : ‘Adjutorem enim et suppetias Alexandria etiam habebat, qui Sardian- 
orum urbem tenebat, qui et frater matris ejus Laodikae erat. Schoene’s critical 
note shows that the manuscript evidence is unanimous in favour of the 
locative (= ‘haghexandreah’). The substitution of the personal name 
(= ‘haghexandré’) in Miiller’s version is due to an emendation of Aucher, 
who found the locative unintelligible. Ido not propose to put forward any 
interpretation of the sentence as it stands; it is possible that a personal name 
may have been omitted either by a scribe or by the Armenian translator, or 
by Eusebius himself in making his compilation. But, in the light of what 
the winged diadem coins have taught us as to the importance of Alexandria 
as a mint of Hierax, it seems clear that scholars should pause before adopting 
Aucher’s remedy. Unless and until further evidence of his existence is 
forthcoming, ‘ Alexander, brother of Laodice,’ must be banished from the 
pages of biographical dictionaries and sent to join ‘ Antiochus, son of Se- 
leucus III., in the world of shadows. - 


GEORGE MACDONALD. 


53 Op. cit. iii, p. 710. Attempts have been Griech. wnd Maked. Staaten, ii. p. 154, note ; 
made to identify the Alexander who is supposed E. R. Bevan, House of Seleweus, i. p. 827). 
to be mentioned here, with the Alexander of Against such identifications there is nothing to 
certain inscriptions (Niese, Geschichte der be said, provided his existence can be proved. 


TWO HEADS OF APOLLO. 


[Puate 111] 


I—The Oldfield Head of Apollo. 


THE beautiful marble head of Apollo, which is represented on PI. LII 
was bequeathed by the late Edmund Oldfield, F.S.A., to the Ashmolean 
Museum. According to a note sent me by Mrs. Oldfield, it was successively 
in the Poniatowski and Brett collections. When it was in the former gallery, 
it was seen by Martin Wagner, and is mentioned by him in the Kwastblatt of 
1830 (p. 238) as closely similar to the Pourtales head, but differing in the 
treatment of the hair. See also Julius in Ann. εἰ. Inst. 1875, p. 33. 

According to the arrangement of Overbeck,’ this head belongs to the 
second class of Apollo-heads with the corymbus; a class of which the four 
principal examples are 

(a) The Apollo Belvedere and the Steinhiuser head, 

(8) The Pourtales head, and that in the British Museum, bought of 
Castellani. 

The Oldfield head is assigned to class B as closely resembling the 
Pourtales head (Fig. 1) in most respects. 

As however the head has been largely made up and restored in Italian 
_ workshops, it is necessary to begin by an inquiry how much of it is genuine. 
This inquiry is difficult because the whole has been cleverly pieced together 
and worked over. The simplest way of indicating the restorations, is by an 
engraving in which the restored parts are shaded (Fig. 2). It will be 
observed that not only the neck but all below the upper lip is modern, also 
part of the forehead, much of the hair, and notably the crobylus over the 
forehead as well as the end of the nose. The greater part of the face is 
genuine, as well as parts of the hair, especially above the left temple, and the 
sa Puree at the back of the head. It is sad to give up so much of the head; 
Ὁ at least enough remains to_assure us of the forms of the face and the 
atment of the hair. The ‘sculptor who did the restoration copied the 


, am 


+ det +o ¢ 
RN cena i 


Bis νος - , ᾿ 
SOBA B.S ΡΟΣ ΗΝ iio p. 141, 


i) A 
ad \ 


1 


118 ΠΡ ΘΑΒΌΝΕΒ᾽᾽ 


= 


Pourtales head, but in place of a faithful imitation he has attempted a more 
detailed and elegant replica, not always successfully. The top-knot or 
crobylus imitates the Pourtales crobylus in its general masses, but goes much 
more into detail, with a good deal of undercutting. But the parts of the 
hair which are genuine, especially that over the left temple, are worked in 
quite another fashion, more simply and flatly, and without any elaborate 
attempt at elegance. The head in its original condition must have com- 


Fie. 1.--- ῊῈ PourTALES HEAD OF ApoLio 


_ pared with the Pourtales head, much as the Florentine daughters of Niobe 
compare with the Chiaramonti daughter. 

So far as the face of the Oldfield head is antique it closely resembles the 
Pourtales face, but the eyebrows are less sharply cut, and the eyes carry less 
expression. Also the tear-duct is more clearly given in the Oldfield head. 
In both heads the mouth is badly restored, with the result in the Pourtales 
head that the left corner is short, while in the Oldfield head the same corner 
is long and shapeless, 


TWO HEADS OF APOLLO. 119 


From a careful examination of such parts of the hair as are genuine it 
results, as already stated, that the restorer has made mistakes. He has not 
only over-elaborated the crobylus, but he has put it in the wrong place, and 
made it too large. Enough remains of the hair in the genuine parts to prove 
that the hair was gathered in a top-knot, but this must have been quite 
small, as in the Steinhiuser head of Apollo. In fact the Oldfield head has 
a somewhat similar relation to the Pourtales head as the Steinhiuser 
head has to that of the Belvedere Apollo: and in each case the restorer in 


Fig. 2.—Tur ΟἸΡΕΙΕΙ HEAp. (RESTORATIONS SHADED. ) 


using the better preserved example as a model in restoring the worse pre- 
served example has fallen into mistakes. For example, in the restored parts 
of the Oldfield head, the modern sculptor has closely copied the loose curls 
over the neck which mark the Pourtales head; and here he is certainly 
wrong, as the curls on the cheeks of the Oldfield head, which are antique, are 
quite different from those of the Pourtales head. 

On the‘other hand, in settmg the Oldfield head on the shoulders the 
Italian restorer has taken a line of his own, and has turned the face much 
to the left and downward, thereby altering its expression. Here I think he 


120 P. GARDNER 


would have done better to adopt the pose at present given to the 
Pourtales head.” 

The measurements of the features of the Oldfield head, so far. as_ 
antique, correspond approximately with those of the Pourtales head. Height 
from chin to roots of hair mm. 210: distance between outer angles of eyes 
mm. 105. . 

The Oldfield head is of good Parian marble*; the restoration from the 
mouth downwards is of Italian marble with blue streaks; the restorations of 
the face and hair are in a marble which appears to be Parian; probably 
fragments found with the head were worked up for this purpose. 

Taking together the three heads of Overbeck’s class β, the Castellani, 
the Pourtales, and the Oldfield heads, the question arises whether they go 
back to one or to two originals. Dr. Julius expresses his opinion that the 
Castellani head is a copy of a bronze original of the second Attic school, and 
that the other two (which of course go together) represent a modification of 
that original which arose in the time of Alexander or the Diadochi. With 
his dates I should be disposed to agree. At all events the Pourtales head 
appears to me to bea fine Roman copy of an original of the earliest Hellenistic 
age. This class of head may have originated with Lecchares, to whom the 
type of the Belvedere Apollo is now attributed by several archaeologists. Such 
heads are found on the coins of Antiochus I of Syria, early in the third cen- 
tury. The Oldfield head is doubtless also Roman of inferior and more timid 
execution, but from the same Greek original. 

I fully agree with Prof. Overbeck that according to all recognized rules 
of physiognomy in Greek art, we must regard the expression of the Pourtales 
head as sad. The lines and forms of eyes and mouth are unmistakable, even 
resembling those of the Niobe. Sir Charles Newton’s assertion that the 
‘earnest pathos of expression’ is produced by the artist’s attempt ‘to repre- 
sent the features of the god while under the influence of musical emotion and 
inspired by his theme,’ falls short of the mark, for the expression of the face 
is not enthusiastic, but sad. This fact is somewhat perplexing. For it 
certainly seems that Apollo in the Pourtales and Oldfield heads is represented 
as a musical deity, or even as the leader of the choir of Muses. And the 
expression which we should expect in that case is the expression of the 
Apollo Citharoedus of the Vatican (Friederichs-Wolters, No. 1528)—enthu- 
siastic and triumphant.® The notion, familiar to the modern world, and 
expressed by Shelley in his well-known line ‘Our sweetest songs are those 
which tell of saddest thought, is not properly a Greek notion. Yet it 
seems to me impossible to avoid the conviction that here the Citharoedic 


2 Formerly the Pourtales head was set on a *In the British Museum: published by 
statue of Apollo to which it did not belong. L. Julius, Ann. d. Inst. 1875, p. 27: Mon. d. 
See Galleria Giustiniana, Pl. 52, Inst. x. 19. 

% I wish to thank Prof. H. A. Miers for his 5 In the poorly executed Vatican Citharoedus 
kindness in carefully examining the marble in there is not much expression in the face, but 
my company, and giving me valuable informa- _ the pose is decisive, 
tion in regard to it. 


« 


TWO HEADS OF APOLLO. 121 


Apollo is represented as in a melancholy mood. And although such a repre- 
sentation is not in the main line of Greek artistic achievement, it would not 
be impossible to find parallels. It was the Greeks who accepted the notion, 
scouted by Coleridge and Wordsworth, that the song of the nightingale is 
sad. And in the Demeter of Cnidus we have a distinct example of a sorrow- 
ing deity. 

After the age of Alexander, the stream of Greek sculpture, which had 


‘until then flowed in a few clearly marked channels, became less well defined 


and more dispersed. Individualism, which made great inroads on public life, 
affected art also; so that it becomes less easy than before to.attribute statues 
to particular schools and periods. The Pourtales and Oldfield heads of Apollo 
are a record of the tendency and the idealism of a particular Greek master 
probably of the third century, whose name is unknown to us, and to whom 
we are at present unable to attribute other works. 


IL—Head of Apollo from the Mausolewi. 


The head of which a representation in profile is here given (Fig. 3) is by 
no means unknown. It was found by Sir Charles Newton among the ruins of 
the Mausoleum, and is mentioned by him in his History of Discoveries, II p. 225. 


' It is figured as a head of Apollo in full face in Overbeck’s Kuwnstmythologie, 


Pl. 20,1 (Text ITI, p. 127). Until recently the front part only of the head was 
exhibited at the British Museum; but Mr. Murray having, at my suggestion, 
applied to it a back of a head in the store-rooms, which also came from Budrum, 
found that the two fitted together, with actual joining surface. 

Overbeck apparently did not know of this back part, which is of im- 
portance, and he does not, as I think, in his text fully appreciate the head, 
though he rightly decides that it must represent Apollo rather than 
Dionysus. 

Unlike almost all the heads of Apollo of this class, it is a Greek original 
of the fourth century, of very strong and clearly marked character, and un- 
touched by restoration or working over. And the find spot, ‘among the 
steps of the pyramid, in the Imaum’s field,’ on the site of the Mausoleum, 
gives us important evidence as to its school. It seems then worthy ofa 
somewhat close study. 

We will begin with the arrangement of the hair, which is very distinctive. 
In this matter Overbeck, being as I have said unaware of the existence of the 
back part of the head, has gone astray, and in consequence he has wrongly 
classified the head as one of those which have no artificial arrangement of the 
hair in corymbus or topknot. But the hair of the Mausoleum head is all 
drawn together in a knot above the back of the head, in a fashion not unusual 
for youths and young girls in Greek art, as I shall proceed to show. 

I may first mention a group of heads with such coitfure which represent 


5. Of. Brit. Mus, Cat, of Sculpture, ii, p. 127, No. 1058 ; Pl. XX. Fig. 2. 


122 P; GARDNER 


Apollo. They are detailed, to the number of 11, in Overbeck’s Kunstmythelogie, 
Apollon, p. 150. According to Overbeck this class of head belongs to Apollo 
as mourning for Hyacinthus, a theory which is based upon a group at 
Deepdene, in which Apollo is represented standing, and beside him a boy 
holding what is supposed to be a discus. This theory does not seem to have 
any adequate foundation.’ In any case the heads of this class have no near 
likeness to that from the Mausoleum. 

Somewhat nearer to our type are the heads mentioned by Dr. Klein in 
his Praxitelische Studien: first of a young athlete at Boston (Figs 1-4, 6, in. 


Fic. 3.—HEAD FROM THE MAUSOLEUM, 


Klein) ; second of a Cora at Vienna (Figs 5, 7, in Klein); third of Apollo or a 
nymph found at Smyrna, and acquired by M. Fournier. The engraving of 
this latter head in Le Bas is so poor, that it is impossible to form any notion 
of its style. 

Both of these groups are regarded generally as Praxitelean in origin. 

Passing from the arrangement of the hair, which is after all a quite 
external affair, to the character of the face, we approach a difficult task, in 
view of the mutilation of the marble. Anyone who examines the Plates of 


7 The chief argument to prove that this why Apollo should grieve for Hyacinthus 
group represents Apollo and Hyacinthus is the while the boy was alive. 
presence of the discus in the hand of the boy. 8 Le Bas, ed. Reinach, Pl. 148, 3. The 
But Michaelis (Anc. Marbles in Great Britain, date is given by M. Reinach as_ the first 
p- 281) gives reasons for thinking that the century B.c. He regards the head as female. 
object is not a discus. Nor does it appear 


᾿ 


TWO HEADS OF APOLLO. 123 


the Kunstmythologie will see that this head stands very much by itself. The 
forehead is narrow and triangular, with a marked swelling above the nose. 
The whole aspect is impassioned. The eyes are long and very narrow, the 
lower lid being almost straight. 

The parts about the eyes are carefully and expressively modelled. The 
mouth is short and full, but much injured. The outline of the whole face is 
a long oval, the proportion of length to breath being about 10 to 7.9 From 
the neck the face is turned to the left. © 

It appears certain that this head belongs to the fourth century, and 
more than likely that it is by Scopas or one of ‘his companions in the 
sculpture of the Mausoleum, since it was found on the spot. And from our 
brief description of the head it will appear that the internal evidence corre- 
sponds to the external. The treatment of the parts about the eyes is such as 
belongs altogether to the second Attic school. Let us then look among the 
works of the sculptors of the Mausoleum, to see if we can find anything 
analogous. 

It is astonishing how greatly our knowledge of the work of the sculptors 
of the Mausoleum has increased in recent years. When Brunn wrote his 
treatise on the frieze of the Mausoleum, and attempted to portion it out 
between the four, Scopas, Leochares, Bryaxis and Timotheus, we knew but 
little about any of these sculptors, and Brunn’s grounds for attribution were 
mostly ὦ priori. But now, as specimens of the work of Scopas we have the 
heads from Tegea, we have a copy of the Ganymede of Leochares,!® we have 
the basis of a trophy of Bryaxis, and pedimental figures from Epidaurus which 
are probably by Timotheus. Thus in dealing with this school of artists we 
are on very firm ground. We are not working from Roman copies which may 
or may not faithfully represent the originals; but mostly from those originals 
themselves. 

Unfortunately, no Greek original among these is very helpful for the 
assignment or identification of the Mausoleum head. The heads from Tegea, 
with their massive framework, eager expression, and wide-open eyes, super- 
ficially present a contrast to ours. On the other hand, we may fairly trace a 
general likeness between it and the head of the charioteer from the smaller 
frieze of the Mausoleum, and a somewhat near parallel to the long, narrow 
eyes with straight under lids may be found in the heads of Herakles of the 
poplar-crowned type, which are usually given to Scopas." 

A head which we must also compare with ours is that of the Apollo 
Citharoedus of the Vatican. Apollo here appears with his attendant 
Muses, advancing in a fervour of inspiration, playing the lyre with both 
hands. .This statue has by most archaeologists been regarded as a copy of 


9 Height fromé chin to roots of hair mm. but recent_studies put it on a firmer basis. 
255 ;i from chin to line of eyebrows- 180 ; 1 Rim. Mittheil. iv, Pl. 8, 9. See below. 
between further corners of eyes about 122, but Overbeck, Kunstmythol. Apollo, Pl. XXI. 


the marble is broken away at the right eye. 82: text, p. 185; where the various engrav- 


10 This is of course not a new attribution; ings of the statue are enumerated. 


124 P. GARDNER 


the Palatine Apollo of Scopas,’* which appears to have been brought by 
Augustus from Rhamnus in Attica and dedicated at Rome. Since, however, 
Overbeck has called this attribution in question, it may be well briefly to 
recapitulate the evidence on which it rests. 

On several of the coins of Nero, the Emperor is represented in an 
attitude almost identical with the Vatican statue. We might be sure before- 
hand that this Neronian statue would be an adaptation of a celebrated Greek 
original. And that the Greek original which was copied in this case belongs 
to the fourth century cannot be doubted, since such a type appears on several 
Greek and Italian vases of the fourth century. - It is an adaptation of a 
type common on black-figured and early red-figured vases,!° an adaptation 
which can only have been made by a great sculptor of the second Attic school, 
and which seems to have rapidly secured fame in Greece. The statue is well- 
suited to an ardent, innovating, life-giving sculptor, like Scopas: and the words 
in which Propertius describes the Palatine statue of Scopas, ‘ Pythius in longa 
carmina veste sonat, apply toit perfectly. Thus, though we are unable to con- 
struct a complete chain of argument to prove the Vatican statue to be a copy ofa 
work of Scopas, we can certainly see that that view has a strong probability 
in its favour.!® 

At first sight the points of contrast. between the Mausoleum head and 
the head of the Vatican Citharoedus will be more obvious than the points of 
likeness. But we must consider that the Vatican head is a Roman copy of 
a superficial kind, and shows none of the delicacy of expression and model- 
ling which we should expect in a fourth century original, and which we find 
in the Mausoleum head. When we come to compare the two heads, detail 
by detail, the difference is by no means so great. The forms of forehead, eye 
and mouth, and the general outlines of the face are really not very different 
in the two heads. The Mausoleum head cannot have belonged to a figure in 
the attitude of the Vatican statue, for it is turned to the left and not to the 
right, in which latter direction, away from the lyre, the head of the musical 
Apollo is usually turned. 

The results of our investigation are scarcely definite. It is, however, 
most probable that the head is of a musical Apollo : the inspired, and to some 
degree sensuous, expression is not to be mistaken. It does not belong to an 
Apollo of the type of the Palatine work of Scopas, yet it may be the head of 
a musical Apollo by Scopas of another type; and in fact in spite of the 
differences between this head and those from Tegea, there is sufficient 
hikeness in the artistic treatment of the parts about the eyes to make one 
think that all these may be the work of the same artist. 


18 Pliny, W.H. xxxvi. 25: Propertius II. 16 The objections brought against this view 
31, 6. by Overbeck will be found in his Kunstmythol. 
M4 List in Overbeck, K.M.: Apollon, p. 323; Apollon, p. 186. They are largely based on 
Plates XXI. 18: XXIV. 20, 24, 25, XXV.3. coins of Augustus and Commodus. While I 
A relief on a well-head of the Louvre, Pl. am unable to explain the inconsistencies put 
XXI. 14. forward by Overbeck, they do not seem to me 
15 List, ibid, p. 322. fatal to the attribution. P 


: fo 


TWO HEADS OF APOLLO. 125 
But though this seems to me the most probable theory, it cannot claim 
The head may belong to an Apollo by Leochares or 
artists of the 


anything like certainty. 
Timotheus. Certainly it is a work of one of the great 
Mausoleum. 

I had written thus far, when the possibility occurred to me that there 
might be among the sculpture from the Mausoleum some other fragments 


as our head. 


belonging to the same statue And on visiting the Mausoleum 
Room at the British Museum, my eye at once alighted on a fragment of a 


shoulder’ of which an engraving is given above (Fig. 4). A head had been 


worked separately and let in. That this shoulder belonged to an Apollo 
7 Tt is thus described in the British Museum and set in a socket. The back is broken 
Catalogue of Sculpture (ii, p. 128; No. 1061). away.’ There seems’ to be no record where 


‘Right shoulder of a draped figure, broken off 
half-way down the upper arm. The- figure 
wore a sleeved chiton, and a large mantle, 
which was thrown back over the shoulders. 
The head of the statue was separately worked, 


exactly the shoulder was found ; but probatly 
it was found on the north side of the Mauso- 
leum, with our head and with many fragments 
of statues. 


126 P. GARDNER 


Citharoedus was at once obvious: the way in which the mantle was thrown 
back from the shoulder, to leave the arms free, and the sleeves, make this 


clear. .Having obtained, through the kindness of Mr. Murray, a cast of the — 


fragment, I have tried experiments in order to discover whether it could have 
belonged to the same statue as our head. The result cannot be said to be 
conclusive, as there is no touching surface: but the connexion seems to me 
probable. 

At first sight the head seems to be on a much larger scale than the 
shoulder. But it seems that, as in the case of the Demeter of Cnidus, the 
head with drapery attached 18 was let into a large hole, and the size of this 
hole makes the shoulder look smaller than it is. The arm is of very large 
size. The whole figure to which shoulder and head alike belong would be 
on the scale of the Deidamia of the Olympian Pediment, or the Niobe of 
Florence. The drapery is of inferior work to the head: but here again we 
can cite as parallels the Mausolus and the Demeter of Cnidus. I can find no 
conclusive reason why head and shoulder should not belong together: and 
it is not likely that there were in connexion with the Mausoleum two colossal 
statues of the Citharoedic Apollo. The accompanying cut (Fig. 4) will give 
the reader some notion of the problem. The blow which broke the head in 
two must have been one of great violence ; the same blow may have driven in 
the base of the head with such force as to have broken- the statue below to 
pieces. 

Supposing that we have here the remains of an Apollo Citharoedus, we 
are unable to say whether the statue was seated or standing. The head was 
turned towards the left shoulder and the lyre, which is not usual but not 
unexampled: see Kunstmythol. pl. XXI. 29, 33, 84:19. it was also upturned, 
which is natural. In any case we have interesting fresh material for the 
study of the Citharoedic type of Apollo, and of fourth century art. 


III.—Scopas and Lysippus. 


Since we have been treating of the works of Scopas, it seems not out of 
place, in concluding this paper, to say a few words as to the present state of 
what may be called the Scopaic question, as to our knowledge of the works 
of the master. Te 

Since the discovery of the heads belonging to the temple of Athena at 
Tegea, Scopas has been to us one of the most distinctively marked of ancient 
sculptors. That those heads must be taken as the best evidence of his style 
is universally conceded ; and their features, the deep skull, the powerful bony 
framework, the overshadowing eyebrow, the large eye and the breathing 
mouth, have been taken as definite traits of this sculptor. Asa result of 
a comparison with these heads other works, such as the Meleager of the 


18 Besides the drapery the fibula which 19 Compare the coin of Argos : Numism. Com- 
fastened it must have been attached to the ment. on Pausanias, I. xxiii. &c. 
head. ; 


»- 
; 
| 


TWO HEADS OF APOLLO. 127 


Vatican, the poplar-crowned Heracles,” and the female heads of Athens and 
Berlin (Brunn’s Denkmaeler No. 174) have been regarded as copies of 
originals by Scopas. But although this view rests on some foundation, I 
think that we are compelled to re-examine it in the light of an important 
recent discovery, that of the statue of Agias, belonging to the group of 
marble figures set up by Daochos at Delphi, and described by M. Homolle in 
the Bulletin de Corresp. Hellénique for 1899. 

With this figure of Agias was found at Delphi an inscription; and Mr. E. 
Preuner*! has been so fortunate as to discover among the papers of Stackel- 
berg an inscription copied by him in Thessaly, and almost identical with that 
at Delphi just mentioned, but adding the important fact of the name of 
Lysippus as the sculptor. Mr. Preuner draws the inference that the statue of 
Agias is a replica in marble of a statue in bronze set up by Lysippus in 
Thessaly: and M. Homolle adds ‘la restitution me parait juste et seule 
possible.’ If this be the case, we have now a far better authenticated speci- 
men of the style of Lysippus than anything that we possessed before. The 
Agias is not actually a work of this great master: but it is a copy, probably 
a contemporary copy, of such a work. It represents an athlete who had won 
many victories a century earlier than the date of the statue; so it is not 
strictly speaking a portrait, but rather an ideal athlete reflecting fully the 
style of Lysippus. 

Before the evidence of a Lysippic origin of this statue had been dis- 
covered, M. Homolle had found in the whole group of statues to which it 
belongs more of Scopas than of Lysippus: ‘ L’analyse du style... . permet de 
découvrir les influences mélangées de Praxitéle de Scopas et de Lysippe, dans 
les types les poses et les proportions. C’est du second que le charactére 
parait le mieux marqué, et c’est dans son école que l’ceuvre aura été executée. 
And, in fact, so long as the head of the Vatican Apoxyomenus was our 
type of the heads of Lysippus, it was almost inevitable that the head of Agias 
should be attributed to the school, not of Lysippus, but of Scopas. The arch 
of the eyebrows, the intense expression, the parted lips, remind us of the 
Tegean heads, though at the same time there are not inconsiderable differ- 
ences: the head of Agias for example is less deep from back to front, and his 
eyes are less full. 

The figure of Agias is not a first-rate work of art: it is of somewhat 
careless finish: though the worst features, the thick ankles, and short lower- 
legs, are due to modern restoration. But such as it is, we are bound to take 
it as our best evidence for the style of Lysippus; the Apoxyomenus has no 
such claims to be regarded as evidence, for it is attributed to the master only 
on internal evidence. Thus the new discovery amounts to something like a 
revolution. I do not propose here to discuss all its bearings: that is a work 
which must be done by someone else; but it is a task of great difficulty and 


30. See especially Graef in Rom. Mittheil. iv. Corresp. Hellén. for 1899, p. 422. 


_ ΚἘ See Ἐς Preuner, Lin Delphisches Weihge- *2 Bull. Corr. Hell. 1897, p. 598. 


schenk, 1900 ; and L. Homolle in Bulletin de 


128 P. GARDNER 


complexity. I will make a few observations, first on the type of head, and next 
on the type of body, which we must apparently regard as Lysippic. 

Before the discovery of the Tegean heads, we had been accustomed to 
regard the deep set eye, the overhanging brow and the breathing mouth as 
Lysippic peculiarities. ‘They were conspicuous in some of the representations 
of Alexander the Great, especially on coins ; and the type of Alexander, 
according to Plutarch, was fixed by Lysippus. But when the Tegean heads 
were found we had to allow that these traits belonged also to the works of 
Scopas. The next step was natural: in view of the head of the Apoxyomenus, 
we were disposed to think that the traits in question belonged specially to 
Scopas, and that Lysippus was less animated and more conventional in his 
art.2 But now if we take into account the head of Agias we must retrace 
our steps, and allow that Lysippus was in his‘own way as notable for these 
traits as Scopas. We must henceforth content ourselves with a much finer 
line of distinction between the two masters, who apparently had much in 
common. 

Next as regards physical type. I have not yet seenin print an observa- 
tion which I have to make. Placing side by side the statue of Agias and that 
of the young Heracles of the Lansdowne Collection,2* which is now usually 
regarded as Scopaic, one finds them to be almost identical in pose type and 
proportions. The Lansdowne Heracles is then definitely a Lysippic work, as 
Michaelis had already judged. Point by point it runs parallel to the 
Agias, with two notable exceptions. First, it is more powerful and solid; 
with thicker neck, broader shoulders, and more strongly marked muscles ; in 
the back in particular the forms of the muscles under the skin are more 
strongly accentuated. This greater force and solidity is obviously appropriate 
to Heracles, as compared with a mere human athlete. And second, the head 
does not resemble the head of Agias: rather it is like the type found in the 
head of the ‘ Meleager ’ of the Vatican, and hitherto given to Scopas. But is 
this type of head really of Scopas? It has points of resemblance to the 
Tegean heads: but it is not strikingly like them. One can see that the head 
in Antike Denkmaeler I. 40 is like the work of Scopas. And one may allowa 
strong influence of Scopas in the heads of Heracles in the poplar-wreath. 
But the Meleager head seems to me so distant from these, that it can 
scarcely be given to the same master. It has become an eclectic, ordinary 
type: and the sculptor who made the Lansdowne Heracles adopted it as one 
familiar ‘to him, while in the body he certainly followed Lysippus. 

In fact, if one places the Meleager of the Vatican side by side with the 
Agias and the Lansdowne figure, it will present anything but a contrast 
with them. ΤῸ judge from photographs of the Meleager, the bodily type and 
the head alike would seem, in view of our new evidence, to be rather in the 


*3 Mrs. Strong, in the Classical Review for 
April, 1901 (p. 188), writes, ‘the expression 
has the true Skopasian inwardness, of which 
the superficial externalizing Lysippus shows 
himself incapable.’ So sweeping a statement 


as this in Ene: to Lost has never been 
justified by the evidence, and is in direct con- 
tradiction to the statement of Plutarch. 
4 Specimens, i. Pl. 40: Clarac, v. 788, 1973. 
36. Ane. Marb. in Great Britain, p. 451. 


TWO HEADS OF APOLLO. 129 
style of Lysippus than of Scopas, But of course without study of the 
original, or at all events of a cast, I cannot go further in this matter. 

On the other hand the only figure of Heracles attached to a head of 


the poplar-crowned type, which is in the Louvre,” is of a thoroughly different 


Fic. 5¢.—STaATuE oF AGIAS FROM 


DELPHI. Fie. 56.—THe LANSDOWNE HERACLES. 


character, thick-set and clumsy. Whether it is in the style of Scopas or 
-of judging ; certainly it is so poor a work 
to the master. 


not we have scarcely any means 
that it can have no close relation But it does not seem to 


Rim. Mittheil. iv. p. 193. 


H.S.—VOL, XXXIII, 


1: P. GARDNER 


have anything to do with Lysippus. It would look then as if the result of a 
closer examination might be to retain the Heracles type for Scopas and to 
assign the Meleager type to Lysippus. But I make this suggestion in a 
merely tentative way. In fact Scopas and Lysippus were as sculptors more 
nearly akin than we had hitherto at all imagined. 

Another work of the fourth century which has a striking likeness to 
the Agias and the Lansdowne Heracles is the beautiful sepulchral relief 
from the Ilissus.2’ The likeness of the head of the young athlete in this 
relief to the head of Agias is striking. Although the influence of the second 
Attic school dominated the tombs of Attica in the fourth century, there is no 
reason to think that that school had a monopoly in their execution, or that 
an Argive artist may not sometimes have been employed. 

It at once appears that if the Lansdowne figure gives us a Lysippic 
type of Heracles, Lysippus can have but a very distant connexion with 
such an extreme and exaggerated work as the Heracles of Glycon, and other 
statues of Heracles of that type. 

But the most serious question is as to the Apoxyomenus. It has always 
been supposed to be the best example of the work of Lysippus, and its finish 
of surface has been taken as a confirmation of the criticism which Pliny 
preserves, ‘argutiae custoditae in minimis quoque rebus. I greatly doubt 
whether in consideration of the Agias we shall not have entirely to recast 
our view of the Apoxyomenus. We now see that Lysippus did not work in 
this minutely anatomical way. It is interesting to compare with the 
Apoxyomenus the fighter of Agasias of Ephesus in the Louvre (Brunn’s 
Denkmaeler, No. 75). The figure of Agasias is more exaggerated, more 
detailed, certainly the work of a later age, but yet the Apoxyomenus shews 
in some respects an approximation to it. The heads certainly differ in 
type. The one statue is in repose, the other in violent action; yet if 
one imagines the Apoxyomenus suddenly put in an attitude of strain, his 
muscles would leap out in this manner. They are of the same highly trained 
nervous type. The long flat afid lean feet of the two statues are much alike, 
The feet indeed are in the case of the Apoxyomenus a feature which can 
scarcely be reconciled with a fourth century origin. If we compare them 
with the foot of the Hermes of Praxiteles we shall find not merely a difference 
of school, but a difference so deep that it must shew a different date. And 
can another work of the fourth century be found which shews the mastery of 
anatomy, and the precision in the rendering of detail, which we find in the 


Apoxyomenus? We must not forget that Lysippus was not the successor of 


Praxiteles and Scopas but their contemporary, and doubtless his work was 
more like theirs than it was like work of the anatomical schools of Asia 
Minor.* 


47 Gardner, Sculptured Tombs of Hellas, Pl. nus:—‘In the Apoxyomenus the whole con- 
XV. ception of the human figure, the whole athletic 
*8 My friend Mr. K. T. Frost, who has made _ ideal, is different. The Apoxyomenus has the 
a careful study of athletic art, writes to me as _ tendencies of the Agias towards length of limb 
follows in regard to the Agias and Apoxyome- and lightness of frame carried a step fur- 


TWO HEADS OF APOLLO. 131 


Thus I think we have been wrong in regarding the Apoxyomenus as 
giving us precisely the manner of Lysippus. In fact, there is none but 
internal evidence to connect this particular statue with Lysippus at all. 
Recently Dr. Loewe ® has called attention to the similarity between the head 
of the Apoxyomenus and those of the ‘ Praying Boy’ and the Hermes of 
Herculaneum, and to the likeness of pose between the Apoxyomenus and the 
Praying Boy. But these likenesses may be used to prove not the Lysippic 
character of the works mentioned, but the Hellenistic character of the 
Apoxyomenus. It naturally occurs to one that the Vatican statue may be a 
copy, not of the Apoxyomenus of Lysippus, but of the Perixyomenus of 
Daippus (Pliny, V. H. xxxiv. 87), the son or pupil of Lysippus. This statue 
stands, as regards the rendering of muscles, midway between the work of the 
middle of the fourth century and that of the Hellenistic schools of Asia 
Minor. Thus it would very well suit the period of Daippus. 

It may of course hereafter turn out that too much confidence must not 
be placed in the evidence offered by the Agias, and that the head in particular 
does not conform to the Lysippic type. But even if fresh discoveries drive 
us to this opinion I think it unlikely that the Apoxyomenus will recover its 


position as the type of Lysippic art. 


P. GARDNER. 


ther. The Agiasisalert ; but it is the alertness 
of stability: the Apoxyomenus, lightly poised, 
seems able to spring off in either direction : the 
waist tapers more, the limbs are yet longer, 
and are made to seem even longer in proportion 
to the body than they really are. Compare for 
example the lower legs of the two’ (apart from 
the restorations): ‘in the Apoxyomenus the 
muscles of the calf are short and swelling, 
while the tendons which taper from calf to 
ankle contribute to the grace which permeates 
the entire design. In the Agias, and in the 
elder Sisyphus, the calf muscles are longer and 
the lower portions of the legs fuller. The 
hollow back of the Apoxyomenus, the way in 
which the muscles sweep inwards at the waist 
from above, and ontwards below, while the 
steel-like subsidiary tendons and sinews prevent 


the slimness from suggesting any lack of 
strength, find no counterpart in the Agias, 
whose back is treated rather sketchily, and 
whose waist, though fine, depends more for its 
strength on the general solidity of the frame 
than on specially developed muscles. It is 
difficult to believe that the two statues repre- 
sent works by the same artist: it is not only 
the type of man but the way in which that 
type is expressed which forms the contrast. 
The Apoxyomenus, however, compares well 
with the Fighting Warrior of Agasias: both 
have the physical character which we associate 
with the thoroughbred, and towards which 
Greek art seems to have progressed. 

39. Rim. Mittheil. 1901, p, 391, Pl. XVI, 
XVII. 


THE COUNTRY CART OF ANCIENT GREECE. 


THE vase painting reproduced in Fig. 1 is taken from a large red 
figured pyxis in the National Museum at Athens. Both lid and body are de- 
corated with wedding scenes, which will be described in detail below (see 
p. 150); we are here more particularly concerned with the group on the 
body, in which the bridal pair are represented as driving to their new 
home. They are seated in a low cart drawn by two horses; the bride appears 
to be sitting in front of her husband, but is probably meant to be by his side. 
The horses are led by a young man, whose exomis and pointed cap mark him 
asa servant. The attempt to render the cart in a realistic manner has 
involved the artist in great difficulties. The two wheels, which are of the 
ordinary four-spoked type, are supposed to be seen in perspective, but they are 
drawn as if they were both on the same side of the cart, the one over-lapping 
the other. The axle and its attachment to the body of the cart have .been 
entirely omitted, as have also the pole, yoke, and most of the harness. The 
side is decorated with curved lines and sprigs of foliage. This vehicle is very 
well adapted to the functions of a wedding-coach as these are described in 
Suidas under the heading ζεῦγος ἡμιονικὸν ἢ Boixov.' The bride is 
fetched in this vehicle from her father’s house and sits in the middle with the 
bridegroom on one side and the best man on the other. Pollux”? mentions 
that on such an occasion a temporary seat was put in to accommodate the 
three side by side. But, common as it must have been in real life, this type 
of conveyance appears but rarely in art. The orthodox wedding-coach of 
vase-paintings, both black-figured and red-figured, is generally the quadriga, 


μετίωσι τὰς νύμφας, ἐφ᾽ οὗ κάθηται ἣ νύμφη μεταξὺ 
τοῦ παρόχου τε καὶ τοῦ νυμφίου. Photius s.v. 
κλινίς has ἃ statement to the same effect. Suidas 


1 Cevtavres τὴν λεγομένην κλινίδα, ἥ ἐστιν 
ὁμοία διέδρῳ, τὴν τῆς νύμφης μέθοδον ποιοῦνται" 
παραλαβόντες δὲ αὐτὴν ἐκ τῆς πατρῴας ἑστίας 


ἐπὶ τὴν ἅμαξαν ἄγουσιν εἰς τὰ τοῦ γαμοῦντος 
ἑσπέρας ἱκανῆς. Κάθηνται δὲ τρεῖς ἐπὶ τῆς 
ἁμάξης" μέση μὲν ἣ νύμφη, ἐξ ἑκατέρου δὲ ὁ 
νύμφιος καὶ ὃ πάροχος' οὗτος δέ ἐστι φίλος ἢ 
συγγενὴς ὅτι μάλισια τιμώμενος καὶ ἀγαπώμενος. 
᾿Ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἡ ἅμαξα ὄχημα λέγεται, ὃ ἐκ τρίτου 
παροχούμενος πάροχος ἐκλήθη ἀπὸ ταύτης τῆς 
συνηθείας, κἂν πεζοί τινες μετίωσι κόρην, ὃ τρίτος 
συμπαρὼν πάροχος λέγεται. 

Poll. Onom. x. 33, οὐ μέντοι ἀγνοῶ ὅτι κλινὶς 
ἐκαλεῖτο τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς ἁμάξης καταστορνύμενον, ὅταν 


is probably wrong in saying that the cart was 
called κλινίς. On a _ krater in the Central 
Museum at Athens (No. 1388) whose subjectisa 
wedding procession, Eros and ‘ Nike’ are repre- 
sented placing three large cushions in the quad- 
riga which is to convey the happy pair away. 
Cushions could be of no use in a quadriga : but 
a scene like this shows that putting them into 
the carriage was a regular part of the prepara- 
tions for the bride’s departure. ~ 


oS 


ΕἾΘ. 1.—Pyxis at ATHENS. 


184 H. L. LORIMER 


rarely the biga; in any case it is a racing chariot. Such chariots, how- 
ever, would be in the possession of the richest citizens only, and cannot even by 
them have been used for this purpose, for they could contain only two persons, 
and these were obliged to stand. They appear on the vases because they are 
the form of vehicle consecrated in serious art; but the Athenian citizen 
must always have had some more practical means of conveyance, one form of 
which is represented on the pyxis. But what the writer in Suidas thought 
it worth while to describe as a curiosity must have been something more 
primitive and rustic than the equipage of this bridal party. The mention of 
the ox indicates that what is meant is the farm-cart, which on great occasions 
would be put to exceptional uses. Few as are the representations of the cart 
in Greek art, they show it engaged in the various functions which fall to the 
lot of a cart-of-all-work, and also at very different stages of development. 


Fic. 2,—RBLIEF IN THE VILLA ALBANIL. 


The most primitive type of all occurs on a cemparatively late piece of work. 
This is a Hellenistic relief* in the Villa Albani at Rome, which represents 
Silenus supporting the child Priapus on a cart of very rude form. It consists 
of a platform made of roughly dressed tree stems laid cross-ways on a frame- 
work, and carried on two block-wheels, only one of which is visible. The 
square axle head sunk in the disc of the wheel shows that, as one would 
- expect in a cart of this type, the axle was not fixed, but revolved with the 
wheels; the axle-bar, however, is not shown, nor the means of attachment to 
the frame-work. The end of the pole is visible between the draught-animals, 
a he-goat and a panther; one end of the yoke which should rest on it is 
shown on the panther’s neck, but has been placed too high. This is as 
primitive a structure as can fairly be called a cart. This relief exemplifies 


3 Published by Schreiber, Hellen. Reliefbilder, lix. 


OO — ———— ὦ ὦ 


ee βὰν 


THE COUNTRY CART OF ANCIENT GREECE. 135 


the connection of the waggon with the religious observances of country 
life, and the same is in all probability true of an example which is of much 
earlier date, and shows the construction more clearly. This is a beautiful 
little Etruscan bronze ὁ in the British Museum, representing probably Demeter 
seated on a cart. It dates to the end of the 6th or the beginning of the 
5th century, and is thoroughly Greek in feeling. The cart consists of a 
rectangular frame-work, formed by three parallel poles united by three cross- 
pieces: a folded cushion has been placed on it on which the goddess sits. At 
both front and back there is an extra cross-piece, which is laid on the top of 
the poles, and has a groove cut at each end, as though for the purpose of 
attaching some object placed on the top. This would probably be a basket 
made to fit the skeleton frame-work, which, unless it had some covering, 
would be useless for most kinds of transport. Hesychius defines the Homeric 
πείρινθα as a basket of this sort: his words are πλέγμα τὸ ἐπὶ ἁμάξης: τὸ 
πλινθίον τὸ ἐπιτιθέμενον TH ἁμάξῃ τετράγωνον. 

The central shaft of Demeter’s cart is prolonged to form the pole: its end 
rests on the top of a curved cross-yoke, in which a depression has been cut to 
receive it. The draught animals have unfortunately disappeared. The axle, 
being meant to revolve, could not be rigidly attached to the frame-work. 
Each of the outer poles has fastened to its lower side a block in which a deep 
notch with a semi-circular head has been cut; the axle was inserted in these, 
and as it was not secured in any way, the frame-work could be lifted with 
the greatest ease. This careful adjustment of the axle is a great advance on 
the very primitive method from which it has developed. This consists in 
merely securing the axle between two pairs of pegs which project perpen- 
dicularly, one pair on each side of the cart. 

The realism of the model does not extend to the wheels. These are in the 
form of flowers with five petals, whose stalks are looped together to form the 
axle. It is a pretty conceit to give these flower-like wheels to the goddess 
of vegetation: but it is none the less evident that they are a very simple 
adaptation of the rude block wheel of the Hellenistic relief. 

This type of frame-work in which the pole is of one piece with the 
central shaft is characteristic of the cart even in its more elaborate develop- 
ments. In early vase-paintings of chariots the pole seems in the same way 
to pass into the frame-work: later it seems to have been a separate piece 
attached after the frame-work was complete, and in red-figured vase paintings 
can generally be seen passing under the body. As the wheels of the chariot 
were of no great size, the body, which rested directly on the axle, was near 
the ground. It was natural that this should be so, for the racing chariot 
preserved the form of the war-chariot, and the war-chariot was constructed 
to allow of the occupant getting in and out with ease. But had the pole 
continued the line of the floor, as it does in the case of the Demeter cart, 
the body would have been tilted up in front when the horses were yoked. 
To avoid this the pole was curved, sloping sharply upwards from the front of 


* Published in the B. M. Catalogue of Bronzes, Pl. XII. 


136 H. L. LORIMER 


the car. In the case of the cart, the difficulty of keeping the framework 
horizontal was solved in another way. The axle-blocks already referred to, 
which were originally provided as a means of holding the revolving axle in 
place, are increased in size, and the body is thus raised to the required 
height. Sometimes the pole is bent upward as well, but it does not cease 
to form part of the frame-work. These axle-blocks characterise the cart 
through the whole course of its development, and seem never to occur in the 
case of the chariot. Figure 6 affords a clear illustration of them. 

Though in most respects this model agrees with the representations of 
the Greek cart on vase paintings, one feature characteristic of the latter is 
absent, namely, the so-called archaic wheel, which in place of spokes has a 
diametric bar with two cross-pieces at right angles to it. The distribution 
of this type, which is not confined to Greek lands, will be considered later. 
A very curious instance of it occurs on a small lead model found by Cesnola 
at Salamis in Cyprus.2 This model, which is in a rather fragmentary con- 
dition, represents a cart of the same type as the preceding one. The body, 
which is very short from back to front, consists of three parallel poles 
united by two cross pieces, the central pole, as before, being prolonged in 
front of the frame-work. It ends in a yoke cast in one piece with it, and is 
strengthened by braces, now greatly damaged, which converged on it from 
the two front corners. At each of the three corners which are preserved, the 
cross-plece projects a little, and has a groove round it, which must have 
served the same purpose as the corresponding grooves of the Etruscan cart. 
Both wheels are preserved, though in an imperfect condition, and quite 
separate from the body. They are of the cross-bar type described above, and 
present a very singular feature, being not round, but markedly oval. This 
may represent a local peculiarity, for another oval cross-bar wheel occurs on a 
Cyprus terracotta to be described below. Elsewhere the cross-bar wheel is 
round. The axle heads are not circular, but oval, showing that the wheels 
were fixed and the axle revolved. In spite of the primitive appearance of 
this model, it is probably of no wery great antiquity, for leaden objects do 
not seem to occur in the early graves of Cyprus. 

Greek vase-paintings furnish a certain number of representations of the 
farm-cart ; but purely genre scenes are so infrequent that it is seldom found 
engaged in its every-day avocations. However, a well-known Ὁ. f. vase of the 
Campana Collection in the Louvre ὁ exhibits two vigorous little rustic scenes, 
in one of which a cart appears, drawn by a pair of mules, and laden with 
a couple of huge amphorae. Behind these the head and arm of the driver 
emerge as he leans forward to prick his beasts with the goad. The cart has 
no sides, and the pole is continuous with the frame-work, which is slightly 
tilted. The wheel is again of the cross-bar type, and has an oblong axle- 
head ; part of the axle is shown, but not the means of attachment to the 
frame-work. τ 

The farm-cart must do duty on all the great occasions of rustic life, 


ὅ Figured Cesnola, Salaminia, Pi. VI. 16 1d. ὁ Pub. Baumeister, Denkm., Pl. I. 18a. 


THE COUNTRY CART OF ANCIENT GREECE. 137 


weddings, feasts, and funerals. It appears as a funeral car on ab. f. vase 
published on page 5 of the Sculptured Tombs of Hellas. The dead man lies 
on his kline, which has been placed on the cart, on the floor of which, with 
their legs hanging over the edge, sit two mourning women, one on each side 
of the couch. The cart is similar to the last specimen, save that the body 
is raised so high as to be level with the top of the cross-bar wheel, no doubt 
by means of blocks like those of the Etruscan cart, but higher. A projection 
which looks like one side of the notch to hold the axle can be seen in front 
of the diametric bar. In this instance also the cart is drawn by mules. 

The excavation of the Cabeiric sanctuary near Thebes has yielded many 
interesting vases, on two of which fine specimens of the cart occur. These vases, 
which have sustained a good deal of damage, were both large skyphoi.’ The 
first offers an interesting parallel to the scene on the pyxis: the subject, 
which is handled with a good deal of rough humour, is a wedding procession 
grotesquely treated (Fig. 3). The scene is from low life. First comes a brides- 
maid wearing a pointed cap, dancing and waving a taenia above her head, then 
the orthodox flute-player, a fat elderly personage mounted on the shoulders of 
another man who supports himself with difficulty by means of a walking- 
stick. Next comes the wedding-coach, a light cart with a low side and a 


Fic, 3.—ScENE FROM A CABEIRIC VASE. 


very high cross-bar wheel, drawn by a spirited pair of galloping donkeys 
crowned with wreaths. The bride and bridegroom are seated side by side on 
separate stools. The bride holds in her left hand a circular object, apparently 
a hand-mirror, on which her eyes are fixed. The bridegroom is an elderly 
man whose baldness is partly concealed by a wreath. The πάροχος, whether 
by mischance or malice, has been left behind, an accident likely enough, at.a 
wedding of this type, to befall a person so obviously superfluous, and is 
vainly endeavouring to get up at the back of the cart.® 


7 The reproductions of the two Cabeiri¢ vases them to the great kindness of Dr. Wolters. 
are taken from proofs of plates belonging to the 8 This vase has as yet been oniy briefly noticed 
forthcoming publication of the German Insti- by Furtwiingler in the Berliner Philologische 
tute. I am indebted for permission to use Wochenschrift for 1888, p. 1483, and by Winne- 


138 H. L. LORIMER 


This cart is much lighter and higher than the previous specimens. The 
wheel is remarkably large ; the axle-block seems to be of the ordinary solid 
type, though a small patch has inadvertently been left unpainted. The axle- 
head is not shown. The side is covered with cross-hatching which no doubt 
represents wicker-work. That this vehicle is the ordinary coster-cart of 
antiquity is shown by the painting on the second vase (Fig. 4), which repre- 
sents a precisely similar cart laden with four large amphorae and drawn by a 
pair of mules; a man walks in front holding the reins. The side of the cart 
is covered with hatching. The wheel is of the same large slender make ; 
neither axle-head nor axle is shown, but the latter was apparently secured 
in the primitive manner referred to above, by a couple of pegs inserted in 
each of the axle-blocks; at least, one such peg is clearly visible in front of 
the diametric bar. Owing to the great height of the wheel, the body in the 
case of both these carts is raised very little above the level of the axle. 


Fic. 4.—ScENE FROM A CABEIRIC VASE. 


These Cabeiric vases probably belong to the latter half of the fifth 
century, and are at least not earlier. The occurrence on them of the so-called 
archaic wheel is sufficient to prove that it is not archaic at all; for it cannot 
be supposed that the artist meant to represent anything but the carts which 
he saw every day. 

The archaic plate in the British Museum ® which represents the sacrifice 
of a goat shows the farm-cart once more diverted from its everyday uses and 
taking part in the festal procession. Again we have the pair of mules, the 
cross-bar wheel, and a side of wickerwork, but there are no structural details. 


feld in the Athenische Mittheilungen of the same leave the figure of the πάροχος unexplained, 
year. Neither takes the subject to bea wedding and itis unnecessary to suppose that the subject 
procession : the one describes itasa manandhis of every vase dedicated in the Cabeirion was 
wife, the other as the Cabeiric goddess herself, connected with the sanctuary. 

driving tothe sanctuary. These interpretations ® Published J. H.8., Vol. v. Pl. VII. 


THE COUNTRY CART OF ANCIENT GREECE. 139 


It appears that no seat has been put in, for the driver and two other 
occupants stand: the fourth is seated backwards on the tail-board. 

A cart partly preserved on a fragment of one of the Corinthian votive 
pinakes now in Berlin may perhaps be also taking part in some religious pro- 


᾿ Fie, 5,—CorInTHIAN PINAX AT 


BERLIN. 


cession. It is a less primitive vehicle than those 
hitherto considered, and appears to be made en- 
tirely of wood. The animals and front of the cart 
have been broken off (Fig. 5), and also the upper 
part of the only occupant, the driver, who stands 
erect. 'Theside is secured by a long pin, perhaps 
of metal, which passes behind a strap or metal 
band attached to the side and runs into the floor. 
The driver's left hand rests on the head of a 
similar pin, which is drawn as though it were 
also on the side of the cart nearest the spectator ; 
in reality it must be supposed to fasten the’ 
further side. The cross-bar wheel is of a fairly 
large size; the axle-block however is low, and 
the floor of the cart is slightly tilted, but the top 
is kept level, the side diminishing in height 
towards the front. The axle-head is oblong. 

.In addition to its other uses, the farm-cart 
must frequently have been used by the country 
people as a means of travel, and in this character it 


appears on a Chalcidian vase in the British Museum” (Fig. 6). The traveller, a 
bearded man, sits on a cushion placed on the floor of the cart, which has no sides 


Fic. 6.—From A CHALCIDIAN VASE IN THE BRITISH MusEvUM. 


and, like the Cyprus lead model, is very short from back to front. The pole 
passes into the framework ; it bends upward, however, like a chariot pole. In 


mB 17. 


140 H. L. LORIMER 


spite of this, very high axle blocks are necessary to keep the frame level, 
owing to the small size of the wheel. This is of the cross-bar type, but the 
axle-head is circular, showing that the axle was fixed, and the wheels revolved 
independently of it. Both speed and smoothness of motion would be greatly 
increased by this alteration. The animals are mules, as is usually, but not 
invariably, the case, and are apparently led by a man who walks at their heads, 
but the reins are not shown. ‘The traveller holds a whip. 

An interesting terracotta of the late sixth or early fifth century, found 
in Cyprus and now in the National Museum at Athens," exhibits a somewhat 
elaborated country cart adapted for travel by the addition of a tilt. In this 
rough but spirited model (Fig. 7) the sides of the cart are continued down 
to the ground, to make a strong support for the tilt above, and the cross-bar 
wheels are modelled on the outside of the surface. They are slightly oval, 


Fic. 7.—TERRACOTYA FROM OCyPpRuS. ATHENS. 


measuring ὍΘ m. horizontally, and ‘075 m. vertically, and reach just to the top 
of the side. The axle-head, a well-marked button-like projection, is circular. 
The space beneath the floor of the cart is entirely enclosed, the front and back 
being filled up with clay. A square hole in the floor of the cart communi- 
cates with this confined space, and may perhaps have served as a socket in 
which to seta figure. It interferes with the line of the axle, and cannot re- 
produce any feature of the actual waggon. The animals, which appear to be 
horses rather than mules, are in the attitude of galloping, their fore-iegs 
being raised from the ground; a clay support is introduced under their 
bodies. The pole once ended in a double yoke, of which only a fragment now 
remains on the neck of the near horse; below this fragment a collar is 
modelled on the animal’s neck. The tilt was added after the completion of 
the cart and horses, as is shown by the fact that in front holes have been left 
to admit the tails of the horses, which pass over the front board into the cart. 


1 This terracotta formed part of the collec- Cyprus, and was certainly acquired there, though 
tion of the late M. Philemon, Greek Consul in the exact provenanceis unknown. ~ 


THE COUNTRY CART OF ANCIENT GREECE. 141 


Along each side and across each end’ of the cart the artist made an arch of 
clay, and joined the two side ones by a horizontal cross-piece at the top. He 
then filled up the spaces at the sides and top with slabs of clay, and plastered 
the whole over, concealing for the most part the lines of construction, which 
can now be seen properly only on the inside; however, the spring of one side 
arch and that of the back one are quite vieible on the outside and are shown 
in the reproduction. There seems no reason to doubt that real tilts were 
made in this way. An opening was left in the tilt in front: the back, 
however, is entirely open, and as there is no tail-board, this is much the 


larger of the two apertures. Evidently the passengers got in at this end. 


Inside the cart, and presumably found along with it, is a small clay seat with 
four legs, which also appears in the reproduction. It is intended for one 
person only. Such a cart, while still fit for miscellaneous work, would be 
very suitable for travel. Owing to the fixed axle, its speed would be much 
greater than that of the ordinary farm cart; it could hold several persons, 
and the tilt would afford protection against the heat, and shelter by night. 
Plutarch 15 tells how a party of Peloponnesian envoys on their way to Delphi 
passed the night at Megara sleeping in their carts, together with their wives 


and children, and how a party of tipsy Megarians earned for themselves the 


title of ἁμαξοκυλισταί by rolling the vehicles and their occupants into a 
neighbouring lake. 

Several references to the tilt under the name of σκηνή occur in 
literature, generally in connection with the closed carriages known as 
harmamaxai or apenai, appropriated in the East to women and grandees, 
Plutarch, describing the manner in which Themistocles was conveyed to the 
Great King, says that oriental women travel in ἁρμάμαξαι, ὑπὸ σκηνὰς 
κύκλῳ περιπεφραγμένας, and that such an apene was prepared for 
Themistocles. Diodorus * uses the name apene only, and says that it was 
adorned with costly carpets, which must have formed the awning. The 
ambassador in the Acharnians * describes the journey of his party over the 
Caystrian plain, ἐσκηνημένοι ἐφ᾽ ἁρμαμαξῶν μαλθακῶς κατακείμενοι. In 
the Cyropaedeia Panthea, when she has parted from her husband, is led 
away by her attendants, who make her lie down in her harmamaxa and 
cover her with the skene.!® The tilt is but rarely met with in art. Two 
terracottas may ‘be mentioned, each of which represents a covered cart 
with a figure seated at the opening in front. The first of these was found 
in Cyprus at Amathus.!” The cart and tilt are represented by a solid 
arched mass of clay whose base rests on the ground; on the side a small 
block wheel is modelled. Behind the wheel there is an attendant similarly 
modelled in rather low relief. In front a cavity has been hollowed out, in 
which can be seen the head and bust of a lady. 


lox. 16 Xen. Cyrop, vi. 4. 11. 
17 Pub. Ohnefalsch-Richter, Cyprus, the Bible, 
oie omens Ἐὃ 196. 


142 H. L. LORIMER 


The second terracotta, which comes from Alexandria, is in the British 
Museum.!® The carriage is in this case four-wheeled, and is drawn by a 
pair of animals whose character cannot be determined. The tilt, which is 
covered with a lattice pattern, has a window of four panes in one side; it 
must be a permanent part of the carriage and not a removable awning. The 
passenger, or perhaps the driver, sits in a shallow niche hollowed out in the 
front of the tilt, which is otherwise left solid. These two terracottas come 
from localities which were meeting-places of East and West, and doubtless 
represent the Oriental harmamaxai. 


Β x 
(Mer \ 
US 


Fic. 8.—From A R.F. AMPHORA AT MUNICH. 


A red-figured amphora in the Munich collection (Fig. 8) shows a lady 
travelling in an open cart somewhat resembling that on the Chalcidian vase 
already quoted, and evidently developed from that primitive type. The body is 
again very short from back to front: a seat has been put across it on which 
the lady sits facing the horses. The cart has now a side made of planks, 
which is high above the wheel, to protect the passengers from splashing, 
but cut away in front, to allow of their getting in; they could no longer 
do this from the back when the seat was a fixture, as it probably would 
be in a carriage intended to carry persons only. At the feet of the lady and 
on the edge of the cart sits the driver, a servant, to judge by his pointed 
cap and scanty attire, and also by his position; an equal in rank would 
naturally have sat by the passenger’s side. It is rather surprising to find 
the primitive wheel on a carriage of this type, which, to judge by the neat 
carpentry and the use of horses instead of mules, must have belonged to a 


48 Published by Mr. G, F. Hill, J.H.S. xvii. p. 88. 


ο΄ ΠῊΒ COUNTRY CART OF ANCIENT GREECE. 143 


of some consideration. The axle apparently revolved ; there is no 


τς axle-head, but a very thick cylindrical axle is visible behind the wheel, 


- 


which apparently was nailed or otherwise secured to the end of it. The 
axle-block is very high. 

_ Part of a very similar cart occupied by two men can be seen on a small 
fragment of a black-figured pinax from the Acropolis now in the Central 


Museum at Athens. It has a four-spoked wheel, and is drawn by four 


horses. The driver sits on the seat occupied by the lady on the Munich 
amphora, and the second man sits behind him. The back of the cart is 
unfortunately broken away, so that it is not certain-how this second person 
was placed ; but a similar representation on a Ὁ. f. oinochoe in the British 
Museum makes it probable that he sat on a second bench, back to back 
with the driver. On the oinochoe the driver sits side by side with one 
companion on the front seat; behind and back to back with them sits a third 
person, who turns his head over his shoulder, as though in conversation 
with those in front. The cart has sides of wicker-work and a cross-bar 
wheel. The drawing is careless, and the axle and its attachment have been 
omitted; the body of the cart, however, stands very low, and the pole slopes 
upwards. A terracotta model of a cart and horses is published by Fréhner, 
Hoffmann Collection, 1886, p. 4, no. 3, pl. ii. The cart has a cross-bar wheel 
with a circular axle-head. The cart of the wedding-pyxis belongs to the 
same class as that of the Munich amphora, though the side is differently 
shaped, and the spoke wheel has ousted the more primitive form. 

The cart in this form was also used for racing. Pausanias tells us that 
from the 70th to the 84th Olympiad there was a race for mule-carts (apenai), 
and two such victories are celebrated in Pindaric odes. Messana and 


- Rhegium in the 5th century struck coins to commemorate successes in 


this race; the type is a cart drawn by mules in which the driver sits 
facing his team. That there was a similar race at the Panathenaic festival 


' is proved by the occurrence of this agonistic type of cart on several of 


the Panathenaic amphorae in the British Museum ; probably the practice 
originated at local festivals, and may have continued there after the mule- 
cart had been banished from Olympia as unsuited to the dignity of the 


occasion. The paintings on the Panathenaic vases are large and clear, and 
enable us to trace the modifications which converted the travelling into 


the racing cart. That on the Burgon vase, though damaged, is the most 
interesting of the series, for it alone retains the cross-bar wheel characteristic 
of the country cart; on the coins of Messana and Rhegium, as well as on the 
other Panathenaic vases, the wheel is four-spoked. 

_ On the Burgon vase the axle-head, though damaged, is plainly circular, 
and the axle is therefore fixed, as indeed it would necessarily be on a racing 
cart. The wheel is of great height and so are the axle-blocks, which are 


7 ΡΎ renee by a cross-piece spore the axle. The cert seems to be entirely 


ἃ te gs Gans eras Num. pp. 92, 93, and the passage from Aristotle, 


8 ate Δεν Hele afoot See B, V. Head, Hist, quoted Pollux v. 75, there referred to. 


144 : H. L. LORIMER 


of wood. That part of the vase on which the front and the pole of the cart 
were represented has unfortunately been lost, but the other paintings of the 
series show arrangements evidently made to secure the greatest possible 
degree of lightness. The whole front of the cart has been cut away, and a 
small foot-board substituted, swung by a couple of cords from the pole; on 
this the occupant, sitting on the floor of the cart,?® rests his feet, his legs 
passing on either side of the pole. Throughout the Panathenaic series the 
carts are drawn by horses. 

A cart of the same sort, drawn by a. yoke of oxen and driven by a 
seated figure appears as the type of a series of Thraco-Macedonian coins #4 
which belong to a period prior to 480 B.c. One has sides of wickerwork: 
its wheel, though damaged, appears to be four-spoked. Another has a 
very clear instance of the cross-bar wheel with a circular axle-head. These 
carts, however, being drawn by oxen, can hardly be agonistic types. The 
children’s carts common on aryballoi and oinochoai of the later fifth century 
are also usually of this shape. 

So far the travelling cart, though attaining to the religious dignity of 
taking part in the great games, has appeared almost exclusively as the 
vehicle of mortals.22 Nevertheless in a somewhat etherealised form it effects 
an entrance into two sets of mythological representations, those, namely, 
which depict Dionysus or Triptolemus setting forth to make known their 
gifts among men. ‘The war-chariot was inappropriate to these peaceful victors, 
and rarely occurs except in comparatively late instances: the primitive waggon 
was unsuitable to journeys of such extent. The travelling cart, which was 
associated with country life and dignified by its use at the great religious 
festivals, becomes the vehicle of these two deities. Some of the earlier 
instances in b. f. art very closely resemble the carts of the Panathenaic 
amphorae with their wooden sides cut away before the wheel, and their 
projecting footboards; often again they are impossibly attenuated, being 


reduced to a seat anda wheel. In the r. f. period they frequently take the - 


form of an elaborate throne on wheels. Ordinarily the wheel is four-spoked, 
that being the form proper to serious mythological art; but at least one 
instance occurs of the cross-bar wheel which originally is characteristic of the 
cart. On an amphora of good b. f. work,?? Dionysus sets out on a winged cart 
with a cross-bar wheel; nothing of the structure is shown but the wheel 
and the supports of the body, two bars which meet in a V-shape above the 
axle. The wheel is of extremely slender proportions, and the diametric bar 
is secured against splitting by clamps. On the reverse Triptolemus is 
setting out in a cart without wings and with an ordinary four-spoked wheel ; 
its sides are of wood with panels of wickerwork. 

These light structures appear very far removed from the lumbering 


20 On all the coins mentioned the driver sits Pl. v. 7. 

on a raised seat. 2 One of the Messana types has a female 
-°) See Brit. Mus. Catal. of Coins; Macedon, charioteer, representing Messana herself, — 

p- 150, and B. V. Head, Coins.of the Ancients, 38 Pub. Gerhard, A.V. 41. 


THE COUNTRY CART OF ANCIENT GREECE. 145 


waggons with which we started: but their development from them has 
been traced through such forms as the carts of the Chalcidic vase and the 
Munich amphora, and their origin is independent of the spoke-wheeled 
chariot. ‘Two features characterise the series, and mark the cart off sharply 
from the chariot. The first is the use of axle-blocks, necessitated by the 
revolving axle and then used to give height to the frame: the second is the 
prevalence of the cross-bar wheel, though this tends to be ousted by the 
spoked form. 

- The cross-bar wheel is directly derived from the block wheel, and is the 
outcome of an effort to lighten it: it is much more primitive than the 
simplest form of spoked wheel. Professor Haddon in The Study of Man 
devotes an interesting chapter to the evolution of the cart, and sketches the 
gradual modification of the block wheel in various European countries. The 
simplest form of wheel is the solid dise cut from a tree-stem in which the 
rectangular end of the axle is inserted; the rest. of the axle is rounded 
to allow of its revolving. Such a wheel and axle are removed but one degree 
from the solid roller which, with the sledge, is generally accepted as the 
hypothetical ancestor of the wheeled waggon. The wheel of the Silenus 
cart is of this type. But such a wheel must always be relatively small, and 
would be difficult to obtain in countries where timber does not grow to a 
large size; hence the next step will be to build up a solid wheel out of 
separate planks secured by cross-bars, as is done by the Basques at the 
present day. Both the simple and the composite block wheel can be 
lightened by perforations of various shapes within their circumference, pro- 
vided that these are not made so large as to weaken seriously the power of 
resistance of the whole. In the case of the composite block wheel, the pro- 
cess may take the form of removing entire planks, those that remain being 
secured by a felloe. The cross-bar wheel exhibits the final step of this 
process, and the modern Cantabrio-Asturian wheel figured by Prof. Haddon, 
which is practically identical with the ancient Greek wheel, shows clearly 
how the result was reached. Only two of the primary planks remain, still 
united by the diametric cross-piece, and the whole is secured by a felloe. 

In ancient times, we have found the cross-bar wheel as far east as 
Cyprus, and as far north as Macedon; it also occurs in Italy, both in pre- 
historic and in classic times. In a turbary at Mercurago two wooden 
wheels were discovered, both belonging to the Bronze Age of Northern Italy. 
The ruder of the two (Fig. 9) has advanced but little beyond the block-wheel.** 
It is formed of three heavy pieces of walnut wood, held together by two curved 
bars of larch wood embedded in the former: on each side of the axle-hole is 
a semi-circular opening. Yet it is evident that this wheel is on the way to 
developing into the cross-bar wheel, and that when the change takes place, 
the central plank will become the diametric bar, and the larch-wood fasteners 
the two cross-bars. In the second example the change has actually taken 


-- 
— SS ee eee 


_™ B. Gastaldi, Lake Habitations and Pre- La Civilisation Primitive en Italic, Pl. B. 1. 
historic Remains, etc, Figs. 36 and 37 ; Montelius, 
: H5.— VOL, XXIII. L 


146 ΠΗ 1, LORIMER 


place. The wheel now consists of a felloe, a diametric bar and two cross-bars, 
the splayed ends of the diametric bar forming two of the arcs of the felloe, 
and thus proving its derivation from the central plank of the first specimen. 
The cross-bar wheel may thus be obtained from the composite block wheel in 


Fic. 9.—WoopEN WHEEL FROM MERCURAGO, 
(By permission of the Anthropological Institute.) 


two ways, either that just described, or that pointed out by Professor Haddon 
in the case of the Cantabrian-Asturian wheel already referred to, where the 
diametric bar is derived from the central cross-piece which held the block 
wheel together, and the cross-bars from two of the primary planks. It may 


Fic. 10,—WoopEn WHEEL FROM MERCURAGO. 
(By permission of the Anthropological Institute. ) 


be noted that the second wheel is considerably larger than the first, the one 
being about two, the other about three feet in diameter. The possibility ot 
increasing the size without seriously increasing the weight is the great 


THE COUNTRY CART OF ANCIENT GREECE. 147 


_ advantage of the cross-bar over the block wheel. The fasteners in becoming 
cross-bars have necessarily taken a new direction. Those of the first wheel 
curve inwards, those of the second outwards, though only to a very slight 
degree. Both these wheels have circular axle-holes and may therefore 
have revolved on fixed axles; the carefully finished cross-bar wheel must 
certainly have done so. No metal was used in the construction of these 
wheels. 
--—..-: Greece unfortunately affords no specimen of an actual wheel, but some 
; details of construction may be gathered from vase paintings and models. In 

several the rectangular axle-head clearly shows that the axle revolved in the 
3 primitive manner: they are the wine-cart of the Louvre vase, the car of 
᾿ Dionysus, the carriage of the Corinthian plaque, the lead wheel from Cyprus, 
and two small bronze wheels found at Olympia. A small bronze wheel 
found in a child’s grave in Samos has an oval hole for the axle.” 

On the other hand the Cyprus terracotta cart, the mule-cart on the 
Chalcidian vase, the ox-cart on the Thracian coin, and the racing cart on the 
Burgon vase have distinctly circular axle-heads, indicating a fixed axle. 
These are not ordinary farm-carts, which would be slow to adopt such an im- 
provement. The Corinthian plaque already referred to supplies some farther 
points. Asin the Mercurago wheel, the ends of the diametric bar are let into 
the felloe : this method of construction is not found in the case of the chariot 
wheel, whose felloe is continuous, the spokes at their junction with it being 
strengthened as a rule by triangular blocks of wood. The ends of the cross- 
bars seem also to form sections of the felloe. The bands of paint between the 
ends of the cross-bars perhaps represent clamps put round the felloe to pre- 
vent its splitting. 

In Italy the cross-bar wheel continued to flourish, for it frequently occurs 
in Etruscan art of the fifth century. A silver coin of this period has for its 
4 type a beautifully clear cross-bar wheel with a heavy diametric bar, a rect- 
. angular axle-head secured by a long pin which passes though it, and cross- 

bars curving outwards, a feature characteristic of the Etruscan form. It 

appears to have a tyre, and the diametric bar is secured against splitting by 
four clamps. 

On one of the sides of a sarcophagus from Vulci a marriage procession 
is carved in relief. The wedding coach is precisely similar to the cart of the 
Munich amphora: the pair sit side by side on the raised seat, jointly support- 

: ing a large parasol, and the driver sits at their feet. The wheel has ἃ rect- 
__ angular axle-head: the two cross-bars are very close together, divided only 
by the axle, and curve strongly outwards. The body of the cart is raised a 
good way above the axle, but the means by which this is effected are not 
_ clear. Two foot-holds are provided as an assistance in mounting. One is a 
αν hung low in front of the wheel, the other is cut out in the low part - 
of the side. | 

"" δ ΑΒ the cross-bars of Spe Biruscan Beate become more and more 


2 PL πανὶ % Boshlau, Ausion, wu. it. Nekr. Pl. xv. 7. 4 
; 2. © 


148 H. L. LORIMER 


strongly curved and approach the middle of the wheel, they are very near 
breaking up each into two spokes radiating from the axle. The form is 
frequently seen in the ornamental wheels of the bronze fire tongs found in 
various Italian sites. An Etruscan relief published in the Wiener Vorleg- 
blitter 2? shows a wheel in which the final step has been taken. The two 
cross-bars have met in the middle: the diametric bar has disappeared, and 
the result is a wheel with four curved spokes. 

This is not, however, a genuine evolution of the spoked wheel from a 
more primitive form. The spoked wheel was of course perfectly familiar to 
Etruscans of the fifth century, and these modifications of the cross-bar wheel 
are conscious endeavours to assimilate its form to that of the other. An 
experiment of the same kind seems to have been made in Greece itself. On 
three black-figured vases 35 in the British Museum the wheel of the quadriga 
has this form: and on one cantharus of the severe red-figured period™ the 
diametric bar remains, and the two curved cross-bars have nearly, but not 
quite, met in the centre. In all these cases the quadriga is represented in 
the three-quarter scheme, and it might be supposed that the curved spokes 
are the result of faulty perspective: but on another b. f. vase, a quadriga in 
the same position has an ordinary four-spoked wheel with the spokes cor- 
rectly drawn. But curiously enough, the cross-bars of the Greek carts are 
always straight, and there seem to be no instances of chariots with the 
ordinary cross-bar wheel. 

For the origin of an object common to Northern Italy, Thrace, and 
the mainland of Greece it is natural to look to some Central European 
locality : positive evidence, however, of the existence of this wheel in that 
area is lacking. Still the assumption of such an origin would account 
for its non-appearance in Greece, so far as our knowledge extends, in 
pre-Hellenic times. It is perhaps worth noticing that the two specimens 
which are probably the oldest of the series are votive offerings from 
Olympia, a site whose history only begins with the geometric age. During 
the classic age it must have been a common object in Greece, though 
the examples through which it is known to us are so few. The cart itself is 
a rare object in art, but when it does occur the wheel is almost invariably of 
this form : ἢ and it is certain that this little bit of realism would not have 


57 Series B, Pl. VIII. 5. 

38 B 252, 254, and 499. 

29 FE 154. 

30 A small bronze model of a cart, found in 
the cave of Psychro in Crete, has a fixed axle 
and four-spoked wheels. It is drawn by a pair 
of oxen, and is of archaic workmanship. The 
passage on the cart in Hesiod (Op. 424-7) un- 
fortunately throws no light on the construction 
of the wheel. It simply recommends the 
farmer to ‘cut a three-span felloe (or wheel) for 
a ten-palm cart,’ (τρισπίθαμον δ᾽ ἅψιν τάμνειν 
δεκαδώρῳ ἁμάξῃ), or, to adopt the explanation 


of Proclus and the scholiasts who follow him 
‘cut a three-span arc for a ten-palm wheel.’ 
Proclus assumes that the wheel is spoked, but his 
assertion is of no value on a point of archaeo- 
logy. He may be right in saying that the 
felloe consisted of four ares, and in thus getting 
a circumference approximately equal to three 
times the ten δῶρα which he takes to be the 
measure ofthe diameter. But this has nothing 
to do with the question of the construction, for 
the felloe of the cross-bar wheel could equally 
well consist of four arcs. The whole passage is 
obscure, for the extraordinary length of seven 


THE COUNTRY CART OF ANCIENT GREECE. 149 


found its way into art at all had not the original been very constantly before 
the eyes of the artist. The Munich amphora and the Corinthian pinax 
show that for a time at least the cross-bar wheel was not confined to the 
primitive waggon. Its disappearance was no doubt a gradual process, and 
had already begun in the fifth century, or even earlier: for the four- 
spoked wheel has supplanted it not only on the wedding pyxis, but on the 
black-figured fragment from jthe Acropolis. These, however, are rather 
carriages than carts: and the Boeotian vases exhibit the cross-bar as still the 
ordinary cart-wheel. 

It occurs on two or three monuments of later. date. An impression of 
a seal on a clay nodule found at Athens represents the earth goddess half 
rising from a cart with a cross-bar wheel, and imploring rain with a gesture 
of entreaty. Professor Furtwiingler dates this object to the fourth or third 
century B.c. <A series of coins of Crannon, struck after 400 B.c., have for 
their type a hydria standing on the rain-making waggon of the city, which 
is represented by two cross-bar wheels united by an axle. But in these 
instances the waggon has a religious significance, and the form of the wheel 
may be due to religious conservatism. 

The type, indeed, is not advantageous: it is much less strong than the 
spoked wheel, owing to the two four-sided spaces which compose its central 
division. Hence it naturally tends to disappear from the carriage and the 
racing cart: for increased speed would mean increased friction, and this it 
could not well support. The great merit of the cross-bar wheel is that of 
being easy to make and easy to repair, whereas the making of spoke wheels 
seems to be always a separate industry requiring special skill. This cir- 
cumstance would, no doubt, help to preserve the cross-bar wheel in the 
thinly-peopled country districts of Greece, where professional cart- 
wrights must have been rare. But it is surpassed by the block-wheel 
in strength and simplicity, no less than by the spoke wheel in strength and 
lightness. The block wheel, the most primitive form of all, is very tenacious 
of life. It has not long been extinct in Great Britain; it still survives in 
Ireland and other European countries ; it probably never ceased to exist in 
Greece, and may have contributed to the extinction of the cross-bar wheel in 
that region. At any rate, while cross-bar and four-spoked wheels have alike 
disappeared, the block-wheel still flourishes, solida simplicitate, in Thessaly. 


feet recommended for the axle has never been 
explained, though Tzetzes calls attention to the 
difficulty. 

The curious scholion by the hand m! in the 
Medicean MS. of Aeschylus, written to explain 
the word σύριγγες in line 188 of the Septem 
seems to refer to a more primitive form of cross- 
bar wheel, in which the cross-bars were more 
numerous. This is pointed out by Dr. Verrall 
in his article ‘On the Syrinx in the Ancient 
Chariot,’ J.H.S. vi. The passage, which is not 
‘there quoted in full, runs as follows :—ovpryyes 


τὰ ξύλα τὰ μέσον TOD περιφεροῦς ξύλου τοῦ 
τροχοῦ διαπεραιούμενα. τὸ μὲν γὰρ αὐτῶν ἐστὶ 
μέγα, τὸ δὲ ἕτερον μικρότερον, ἄλλο δ᾽ αὖ τοῦ 
δευτέρου μικρότερον, λόγον τῶν αὐλῶν τῶν 
συρίγγων ἐπέχοντα. 

δεύτερον and ἄλλο cannot refer to the two 
bars of the ordinary cross-bar wheel, which of 
course are always of the same size. The evi- 
dence of the monuments does not favour the 
supposition that such a wheel was ever character- 
istic of the chariot. 


150 Η. 1. LORIMER 


The pyxis reproduced on p. 133 was found αὖ Eretria.*' It is of unusual 
size, measuring 16°9 centimetres in diameter, and 8:9 in height, exclusive of 
the lid. The body is raised on three small feet. The drawing belongs to 
the fine period, and is not without elegance, though very careless in details. 

The-design on the lid comprises six human figures, which are divided 
by Erotes painted in white into three groups of two each.» The first of these 
consists of the bride seated at her toilet, and a maid who hands her a mirror 
and toilet-box. The bride wears a veil, one corner of which she draws 
forward with her right hand. The face arms and feet of the attendant are 
painted white, the only instance on the lid of the use of white for a human 
figure; evidently the object is to carry up the lines of the white Eros who 
kneels behind her, arranging the folds of her train. In front of the bride 
stands the loutrophoros, which frequently appears in bridal scenes ; a striding 
figure is painted on it in black. Behind her chair is a second vase, which, 
like the loutrophoros, appears in a certain number of representations of 
weddings, and of which actual specimens are extant. It consists of a round 
receptacle mounted on a sort of pedestal, and has recently been identified by 
Dr. Zahn with the γαμικοὶ λέβητες of an Eleusinian temple inventory.*? An 
Eros stands beside this vase, with which he is occupied in some way; on the 
original lines in relief can be seen passing from his hands to the vase. These 
are probably the traces of an object now effaced. A clue to its nature is 
afforded by the vase-painting published by Hartwig in the Hph. Arch, 1897, 
where the companions of the bride are engaged in placing branches of a 
flowering shrub ** in the loutrophoros, and in a pair of γαμικοὶ λέβητες : pro- 
bably the Eros was similarly occupied, though the flowers and leaves have 
been effaced. These vases were afterwards carried to the house of the newly 
married couple.*4 

A kline with a cushion on it separates this group from the next, which 
consists of a young man and a girl standing side by side. The man wears a 
petasos and sandals, and has a chlamys wrapped round his arm. The girl 
wears a Doric peplos, and draws forward one corner of the diplois with her 
left hand; in the right she holds a large fan with a long handle, doubtless to 
be used as a parasol for the bride in the procession.*® This pair perhaps 
represents the πάροχος and the vupdevtpia.** The third group consists of a 
young man and a woman, both seated. The young man wears a wreath and 
probably represents the bridegroom. 

The principal group on the howe of the vase consists of the bride and 


3! T have to thank M. Stais for kindly giving 
me permission to publish it. 

32. For literature on this subject see Robert, 
Arch. Zeit. 1882: Hartwig, EHphem. Arch, 
1897 ; Wolters, ‘ Vasen aus Menidi’ ii. Jahrb. 
1898. The last named article demonstrates the 


33 The flowers, which on the ociainal are 
clearly given in white and purple paint, are 
omitted in the reproduction. 

34 See Deubner, ‘ Die Epaulia,’ Jahrb. 1900. 

35 On a vase-painting pub, Annali, 1840 N, 
_Yrepresenting the libation of Oenomaus, Hippo- 


great antiquity of the type, and its connection 
with funeral as well as with marriage rites, two 
further points of resemblance with the loutro- 
phoros. 


dameia is led by an attendant who fans her with 
a similar fan. 

δ ἡ συμπεμπομένη ὑπὸ τῶν γονέων τῇ νύμφῃ 
παράνυμφος. Hesychius. ; 


- 


—— TRE counTRY CART OF ANCIENT GREECE. 151 


Bridegroom in their wedding coach, which has been already deseribed. In 
- front of the servant who leads the horses walks a girl carrying some object 
in her hands: behind the carriage there is a woman with a torch in each 
hand, and behind her again a young man on horseback wearing a chlamys. 
The rest of the space is filled up with stock figures, which have no connection 
_ with each other or with the main subject ; there are threé seated and two 
standing male figures, two maids, and two Erotes. 

The best literary parallel to this scene is afforded by the well-known 
passage in the fragmentary second oration of Hypereides, which describes a 
wedding procession in the following terms: ἀνάγκη. γὰρ, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταὶ, 
πρῶτον μὲν ὀρεοκόμον Kal προηγητὴν ἀκολουθεῖν τῷ ζεύγει ὃ ἦγε τὴν γυναῖκα, 
ἔπειτα δὲ παῖδας τοὺς προπέμποντας αὐτὴν ἀκολουθεῖν. The ὀρεοκόμος or 
coachman walks at the heads of the horses, and the mounted man behind 
probably represents the παῖδες. The προηγητής, or figure with a herald’s 
wand frequently represented at the head of wedding processions, does not 
appear.on the vase; and the πάροχος is omitted alike from the description 
and the painting. The horseman is a rare figure, but is found on the fragment 
of an epinetron published, together with a conjectural restoration, in the 
Wiener Vorlegeblitter, 1888, Pl. viii. All that remains of the original is part 
of a low cart in which the bridegroom and bride are seated side by side, and 
a young man on horseback, who comes immediately behind them, The resem- 
blance to the scene on the pyxis is very striking. 

A wall-painting representing the marriage of Bacchus and Ariadne,*’ 
which was recently discovered at Pompeii, gives the ordinary figures of a Greek 
wedding procession in a mythological dress. A kline has been placed on a 
waggon drawn by a pair of oxen, and on this Bacchus and Ariadne recline, 
On the right a couple of Maenads represent the female attendants of the 
bride, on the left two satyrs, one mounted on a mule or donkey, replace the 
horseman of the pyxis. | 


H. L. Lorimer. 


37 See Mau, Ausgr. v. Pompeii, Rim. Mitth., xvi. p. 342. 


THE BRONZE STATUE FROM CERIGOTTO:! vs 


[Puates ΠῚ. IX.] 


In February, 1901, M. Kabbadias very courteously sent to the Society 
for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies, of which he is an honorary member, 
some photographs and a brief description of the remarkable series of bronze 
and marble statues found in the sea off the north coast of Cerigotto. In view 
of the great interest that had been excited by this discovery, M. Kabbadias’ 
communications were at once laid before the Society at an open meeting, and 
were also published in this Journal.?, But the fragmentary state of the 
figures and the corrosion of their surface prevented the possibility of any 
final judgment as to their general effect or the details of their modelling. 
If this was the feeling even of those who had seen the originals, it was far 
more so with those who could only judge from somewhat unsatisfactory 
photographs of them; and such opinions on them as were expressed at the 
time would be admitted by the authors to be subject to revision in the 
light of a more complete and careful study. A certain amount of misunder- 
standing was due to the general interest taken in the discovery, and the 
consequent demand for some authoritative and generally intelligible informa- 
tion about it*; for example, the claim put forward by M. Kabbadias for the 
Cerigotto statue ‘to rank as high*among statues of bronze as does the Hermes 
of Praxiteles among those of marble’ probably led to its comparison with 
that masterpiece, to which its resemblance is only superficial. 

The study of the Cerigotto bronze has now entered on a new phase, with 
the completion of its cleaning and restoration, and with its publication by 
M. Kabbadias in the "Ednuepis ᾿Αρχαιολογική for 1902, p. 145, and Plates 
7-12. Under these circumstances it has been thought that a new reproduc- 
tion,‘ together with a brief note on the statue as now exhibited, would be 
welcome to the readers of this Journal. 


1 The modern Greek official name of the less or untenable, some have already been 
island is Antikythera—apparently a recent withdrawn by their authors. It was really 
coinage. The ancient name is Aegila or impossible to form any clear opinion before the 
Ogylos, the local modern name Singilio. statue was cleaned and put together. 

2 xxi., 1901, p. 205. 4 The photographs reproduced in Pll. VIII., 

3 I have not thought it necessary to refer in 1X. were kindly supplied by Mr. Bosanquet. 
detail to the earlier theories ; some were base- —< 


THE BRONZE STATUE FROM CERIGOTTO. 153 


M. Kabbadias gives a complete account of the external evidence as to 
the statue—of the circumstances of its discovery by divers, of the other 
statues in bronze and marble found with it, of the ship and its furniture. 
All this evidence goes to show that the shipwreck must have occurred some 
time in the first or second century before our era, a date confirmed by the 
character of the pottery found among the contents of the ship. There is, 
therefore, much probability in the conjecture made by M. Kabbadias at the 
first discovery, that the ship was carrying a cargo of the spoils of Greece to 
Rome; but there is no confirmation of its suggested identity with the ship 
with part of Sulla’s plunder which was lost off Malea; indeed, that ship 
would probably have had a richer burden. The various statues found are of 
a very miscellaneous character—mostly, so far as they can be dated, of the 
Hellenistic age. But it is impossible to draw any inference from the whole 
collection as to any one statue belonging to it, except that the circumstances 
seem to preclude the possibility of any of them being much later than the 
beginning of the Graeco-Roman age. No earlier limit can be fixed, for it is 
evident that any statue—of the fifth or fourth century, or even earlier—might 
find its way into such a mass of various plunder. 

Each of the statues found, and among them the life-size bronze figure 
which is reproduced in our plates, must then be judged entirely on internal 
evidence, from a study of its style and its subject. Before we consider these, 
it will be as well to add a few words on the question of the cleaning and 
restoration which it has undergone. In the process of cleaning the bronze, 
the expert assistance of M. Rhousopoulos, Professor of Chemistry in the 
University of Athens, was called in. He adopted a method similar to that 
which had been applied to the Acropolis bronzes,’ and with a similar result. 
The patina has been entirely destroyed, and the surface of the bronze is now 
almost black. This may have been necessary for the cleaning and preservation 
of the statue, and without special knowledge as to its condition and the 
chemical or other processes that had to be employed, it is impossible to 
criticise fairly what has been done; but one may be permitted to regret, 
from the artistic point of view, the necessity for such measures. The 
restoration of the statue—that is to say, its mounting in an erect position, 
_ and the filling up of the cracks and gaps that still remained after the extant 
fragments had been pieced together—has been entrusted to M. André, who 
was summoned from France for the purpose. He has done his work skil- 
fully; but the restored portions have been made indistinguishable in colour 
and texture from what remains of the original. The amount of restoration 
necessary can be seen in a photograph published by M. Kabbadias ; it amounts 
only to some small portions, chiefly below the neck and in the front of the 
thorax and abdomen. It would have been easy, by a slight difference in 
_ colour, to have made the restorations distinguishable ; this would have been 
a help tothe student, and would, in the case of the general public, have 
removed a certain feeling of uneasiness, the lack of confidence in a statue known 


5 See J.H.S., X., p. 275. 


154 “BA. GARDNER 


to be restored to some indefinite extent. As a matter of fact, the extant 
fragments adjoining the gaps leave little room for doubt as to the correct 
restoration of the added portions. The general form of the abdominal 
muscles is not doubtful—a fact of importance, in view of the peculiar 
character of their modelling. 

When the statue was first found it was confidently claimed as an original 
of the fourth century. Those who could only see it a small piece at a time 
in or out of its bath of acid did not feel competent to express any criticism 
of this opinion, though the details of the modelling, especially in the arm 
and hand, aroused some doubts as to its correctness. Now that one can see 
the whole statue, set up in the Museum at Athens, or examine the series of 
photographs that is now accessible, I think there is a fairly general feeling 
among archaeologists that it is no longer possible to regard the statue as an 
original of the fourth century. I do not propose, in the space and time now 
available, to make any attempt to assign the statue finally to its date and 
school; but merely to give a brief indication of the reasons that induce me 
as well as others to assign it to the Hellenistic rather than the Hellenic 
period. 

Let us consider first the type of the head, the only part that could be 
appreciated before the statue was pieced together, though its surface was 
obscured by corrosion. The question of its resemblance to the Hermes of 
Praxiteles has already been touched upon; such resemblance as there is 
consists mainly in the physical type represented, and so far might be 
considered as an indication of Attic origin. There is very little artistic 
affinity with the style of Praxiteles; there is no trace of the fine sweep of 
the lines of the brow away towards the temples that is characteristic of 
Praxitelean heads; the nose, as compared with that of the Hermes, lacks 
distinction of shape, and the mouth is small and weak. The head has also 
been compared with a class commonly attributed to Scopas, a class including 
the Lansdowne House Heracles among others®; but the resemblance here 
also appears to be superficial rather than essential. The hair, indeed, is 
very similar—so similar as to suggest imitation, especially in the little locks 
standing erect above the forehead; the eyes, also, are set in deep shadow, 
and there is a heavy overhanging mass of flesh below the brow, as in the 
Scopas heads. But the resultant expression is totally different; there is 
nothing of the passionate, far-away look that is characteristic of Scopas ; 
and it is impossible to imagine a greater contrast with the dilated nostril 
and half open, panting lips of Scopas than is offered by the nose and mouth 
of the Cerigotto statue. The slight and graceful proportions of the face— 
all the more conspicuous for their contrast with the heavy torso—are also 
unlike the massive proportions of Scopas. It would be easy to carry these 
comparisons further; but the impression may be summed up in imitation 
of a well-known saying—there is something of Praxiteles and Scopas in the 


6 I regret that I was prevented from hearing _ read before the Hellenic Society. 
Dr, Waldstein on this matter, in his paper 


THE BRONZE STATUE FROM CERIGOTTO. 155 


head, but little that is either Praxitelean or Scopaic. To put it in another 
way, it is not the work of a contemporary of those masters, but of a later 
imitator; and of an imitator with the eclectic taste that marks the 
Hellenistic age. 

. When we come to consider the limbs and torso, the Hellenistic character 
of the work asserts itself even more emphatically. The muscles of the torso, 
and especially those of the abdomen, are very heavy, and out of keeping with 
the rather slight proportions of head and limbs; they betray the anatomist 
in their laboured modelling, and contrast with the free and rapid observation 
of living nature that gives so great a charm to the work of the fifth and 
fourth centuries. The modelling and surface treatment of the limbs, 
especially of the outstretched right arm and hand, are such as of themselves 
to cast doubt on the possibility of a fourth century origin. The uncouth 
realism in the rendering of the sinews of the arm and the skin of the hand 
might have occurred in an archaic statue ; but such work does not recur until 
late in the Hellenistic period. 

It is, however, above all the general effect and pose of the statue that 
give the first impression of the lateness of its date. There is a lack of 
simplicity, a seeking after theatrical effect, that is obvious at the first glance, 
and that still makes itself felt after a longer study.’ It is perhaps unfair to 
make this statement without expressing an opinion as to the subject and the 
action of the statue; but the mere fact that, although its action is apparently 
so distinctive, so much controversy has been possible as to its meaning, 
suffices to some extent to justify the charge; one may remember the analogy 
of the Aphrodite of Melos, itself a fine work of the Hellenistic age. The 
object of which the handle is visible in the left hand may be a strigil, held 
ready for use; but the statue is certainly not an apoxyomenos in the act of 
scraping himself; in that case the peculiar action of the right arm would 
have no meaning; it is not merely stretched out, as is sometimes the case 
with athletes holding strigils, as depicted on vases, but is held up in a 
constrained position, evidently for some definite purpose. What that purpose 
was it is impossible to say ; the object once held between the two fingers and 
the thumb of the right hand must have been approximately spherical. It is 
inconceivable, even in a Hellenistic work, that an athlete should hold out an 
oil-flask in such a manner, nor does the action fit the notion of holding out 
an apple or some such object. Perhaps the impression most obvious to a 
spectator is that the statue is holding out some object in the direction of the 
goal on which his eyes are fixed, and so possibly is taking aim; but even for 
this the action is not very appropriate ; nor have we any record of an athletic 
contest consisting in throwing a ball at a mark. Another possible suggestion 
—perhaps the most probable—is that the statue represents an athlete in the 
act of catching a ball that has been thrown to him ; if so, however, it must. 


~ 


The photographs, being taken with a wide- awkwardness of the pose; but even in the 


angled lens from too close, exaggerate the original it is felt. 


͵ 


- ᾿ Ὁ hy =. 
~ = 
᾿ ᾿ + 
ae ah eS) ᾿ ἢ 
“δ _ ae he ? - ΝΕ ἃ 


156 THE BRONZE STATUE FROM CERIGOTTO. 


be admitted that his pose is somewhat affected, and ill suited to the action. 
But, whatever be the interpretation, it can hardly be disputed that the centre 
of interest and so of composition is outside the statue itself; there is, in 
short, a deficiency of that αὐτάρκεια which is a quality rarely if ever absent 
from statues of the fifth and fourth centuries, though often enough violated 
by the dramatic and sensational work of Hellenistic sculptors. 

All these considerations lead us to the conclusion that the Cerigotto 
bronze is a statue, probably of an athlete in a somewhat theatrical pose, 
dating from the Hellenistic age; and showing in its execution the eclectic 
character, the combination of mannerisms copied from earlier artists with 
anatomical study and realism in details, which is often to be seen in works 
of that period. A more careful study and comparison may probably lead to 
a closer definition of its date and school; but this it is perhaps wiser not to 
attempt at present. 

In conclusion, it is well to guard against any depreciation of the high 
artistic value of the new bronze statue. If the present short study has been 
devoted to pointing out its defects rather than its excellences, this is because 
the former are what distinguish it from others and so enable us to assign its 
date, while the latter are what it probably shared with a countless number of 
fine bronze statues that have now been destroyed. As a bronze original of 
Greek, even if of later Greek workmanship, its value both to the artist and 
to the archaeologist cannot easily be exaggerated, and even the claims that 
were made for it on its first discovery were hardly excessive. 


E. A. GARDNER. 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 


[PLrates IV.—VITI.] 


In the first provisional reports of the Excavations in the Palace at 
Knossos, published by Mr. Evans after each season’s work, the general 
accounts of the distribution and stratification of the pottery play a part 
in accordance with the importance of this kind of evidence in its bearing 
on the history of the site. From these accounts it will be seen that there 
exist on the Palace Site of Knossos and its neighbourhood three distinct 
strata of deposit. 


I. A prehistoric, neolithic stratum, first of all verified in the prelim- 
inary pits on the E. slope of the Knossos Hill and successively afterwards in 
the W. and N.E. regions of the site, then in test-pits sunk within the palace 
boundaries in the region N. of the S. Propylaea in the Central Court, in the 
Third Magazine and in the West Court. These test-pits all reached a depth 
of from seven to eight metres before virgin soil was reached. This gives a 
thickness of neolithic deposit starting from the virgin soil and extending 
upwards to the beginnings‘of the painted series averaging about six metres. 
This formidable depth of pure neolithic deposit is very much greater than 

_ any yet verified in the Aegean region, and in its gradual formation is in itself 
evidence both of the extreme longevity and of the unbroken continuity of 
development of the civilization represented by it.? 


- 


II. Beginning already with the latest neolithic stratum, we have the 
first appearance of painted Cretan ware, verified in different phases at 
different points in deposit, found superimposed upon the full neolithic and, 
where undisturbed, underlying the later deposit of the palace and of its 
neighbourhood.* This includes what may be termed the Early and he 
Minoan classes. 


- 


III. Last of all comes a ‘late Minoan’ stratum, represented all over the 


Mikko vi. vii. viii. This paper has been Hogarth on parts of the city site afford further 

n at the request of Mr. A. J. Evaiis. evidence of the wide distribution at Knossos of 

Oo helt ethene argamm Minoan ware of the best period. See Hogarth- 
eoli Welch in J. H.S, xxi. 73—98, Pls, vi. vii. 


= 


4 


158 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


palace region down to the floor-levels and outside all over the city site next 
the surface in regions where there is no later deposit. The later phase of 
this class covers the fabrics elsewhere described as Mycenaean. 


I.—The Pottery of the Neolithic Period. 


For data of the neolithic deposit of pottery it will be convenient to rely 
chiefly on the results obtained by means of the test-pits sunk in the W. 
Yourt from the surface, and in the Third Magazine from the floor of the latter 
downwards. In both these cases the pottery and other finds from successive 
metres were kept apart and put into separate bags. As in the W. Court 
test-pit, sunk as it was from the surface, the series is complete, it will be 
advisable to take that as our standard, at the same time keeping the results 
of the other test-pit in view for comparison. 

1. The earliest pottery of Knossos, that which was found in the deepest 
metre just above the depositless virgin soil, was in the case of both test-pits 
hand-made and more or less burnished. But it was significant of the very 
early character of the ware that in neither case were there any incised 
fragments—in the W. Square test-pit there were in this first metre 168 
fragments of which none were incised, in the pit of the Third Magazine out 
of 44 fragments none were incised. From this fact, one cannot, however, 
with absolute certainty conclude that at this early period at Knossos no 
pottery was incised, but at any rate we can be sure that the very earliest 
pottery of all, as represented next the virgin soil, was as a whole unincised, 
and that throughout the period, which may have been a long one, re- 
presented by the deposit in question the decoration of pottery by means of 
incised lines‘ must have been in its beginnings. The fragments were of 
common household vessels. There were rims and handles of pots, :rims of 
basins, bowls and plates as well as many pieces fractured all round, from 
which the forms of the vessels. to which they belonged could not with 
certainty be judged. All the fragments have a sooty grey, imperfectly sifted 
clay, which in the case of the coarser kinds of ware is impregnated with 
sand particles or pounded stone dust. There is, of course, at this early 
_ period no trace of potters’ ovea or wheel. The vessels being wide-mouthed, 
they are usually hand-polished both inside and out. There are, as yet, no 
narrowed necks and no organically differentiated bases, but only perfectly 
simple flat bottoms without ring or foot. 

In Crete neither at Knossos nor anywhere else in the island, so far as 
known, have tombs been discovered with ware corresponding to this earliest 
domestic ware found in the deposit immediately above the virgin soil 
underlying the palace of Knossos and its precincts. 

That this primitive deposit was practically uniform for a considerable 
depth was shown by the fact that in the second metre from the bottom in 
both pits the pottery—rough pots, jars and basins and finer bowls, saucers 
and plates—was identical with that in the first metre. In this metre incised 


- THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 159 


ware appeared for the first time, but in almost inappreciable quantity—in 
the Third Magazine out of a total of 164 fragments, two were incised, while in 
the W. Court test-pit out of a total of 204 sherds none were incised. Once 
the incised ware has begun to appear we find that from this level upwards its 
presence, in a slowly increasing, though always small percentage, is constant: 
Thus, the third metre yielded from one to two per cent, of incised ware, the 
fourth metre about three per cent. In view of these data, it may be 
considered that the deposit of the third and fourth metres represents the first 
stage in the incision of neolithic ware. 

2. With the fifth metre we enter upon a new phase of development. 

Here the proportion of incised fragments is still only from two to three 
per cent. but we become conscious of an important innovation when we 
notice that almost all the incised fragments have traces of white-filling—in 
the fifth metre of the test-pit in the Third Magazine, out of 524 fragments, 18 
happened to be incised, and of these almost all showed the incisions filled 
with a kind of white chalk. Here we are no longer at the primitive stage 
represented by unincised, and the early tentative experiments in incised 
pottery. With the first use of a colour-pigment producing a light design on 
a dark ground, we have the inauguration of a new style destined to have a 
long history. The use of white-filling is in the course of time sure to suggest 
the use of similar colour on the flat to produce geometric effects outwardly 
similar to those produced by white-filled incised designs. It is, however, 
noticeable that no such use of colour on the flat ever occurs in the neolithic 
deposit of Knossos at all. 
The circumstances in which the white-filling occurs elsewhere afford 
indication that over a wide field the technique marks an advance on the 
pottery of the more primitive period. Thus the pottery with white-filling 
from ‘Troy must now be assigned to the same general context as the similar 
pottery from Knossos.£ Fresh important data are also forthcoming from 
Egypt in the shape of similar ware found in circumstances which show that 
it must be an importation. If, as is probable, the importation was from 
the Aegean, then the ware in question must come into the same context as 
that from τοῦθ The Egyptian finds are of special importance as affording 
chronological evidence, in complete accordance with that from Knossos, as to 
the probable time-limits within which the pottery in question continued in 
vogue, That this period was a long one is shown both by the depth of 
deposit at Knossos, and by the time covered by the tombs in which the. 
pottery with white-filled incisions occurred in Egypt. 

Equally important is it, however, to observe that not only the incised 
but also the finer kinds of unincised hand-polished wares have now entered 
on a new stage of development. Already in the primitive period we find the 
potter striving in the case of the finer varieties of vessels to give an ever 


ἡ 


- 


4 Incised pottery with the incisions filled See Troja wnd Ilion i. 251. 
with white is found at Troy to belong already 5 Diospolis Parva. The Cemeteries of Aba- 
to the period represented by the First stratum. diyeh and Hu, 1901, 14. 


= i 


~ 


160 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


greater degree of lustre to a surface which becomes more and more uniformly 
black as time goes on. The finer kinds of ware, both incised and, unincised 
increase in quantity and improve in quality in this second or geometric period. 
In the case of the unincised fragments, however, the new phase of develop- 
ment is characterised by the fact that once the greatest possible amount of 
sheen has been obtained, it is now apparently sought still more to heighten 
the glitter by finely rippling or undulating the surface. Before the vessel 
was fired, the point of some blunt instrument, probably of bone, was evidently 
passed vertically from the rim downwards all round so as to produce minute 
waved rills similar to ripples on the surface of water. On the surface so 
rippled having been finally burnished the effect is produced which is seen on 
Pl. IV, 6-14. 

The ware with rippled surface, once it came into vogue, had a long history. 
At Knossos it survives throughout the whole neolithic period from the time 
of its first appearance. In the succeeding period again we find a survival or 
reminiscence of the style in a new medium—lustrous brown-black glaze on 
a buff clay-slip ground. On Pl. IV, 6-14 are the specimens of neolithic frag- 
ments with the rippled surface referred to. The first row of fragments, 1-5, 
shows the later, painted imitations of this ripple motive. The close resem- 
blance of the later painted imitation to the burnished prototype is at once 
apparent. Of the ‘Mycenaean’ motive we shall come to speak later. Suffice 
it here to point out the curious fact that the later painted decoration is most 
frequently to-be found on vessels that are themselves imitations of a metal 
prototype. Typical is a kind of large one-handled cup, itself a variety of the 
Vaphio type. In later Mycenaean times all reminiscence of prototype becomes 
lost and we find the system of decoration applied in the case of vessels, such as 
common rounded bowls and cups, that probably never had originals in metal. 

The actual proportions show that, once this motive came into use, it was 
fully as popular as the incision of the pottery itself. In the fifth metre in the W. 
Square test-pit out of 106 fragments 2 were incised and 2 had the rippled 
surface. In the sixth metre we find the motive fully in vogue and a power- 
ful rival to incision, for out of 186 fragments only 3 are incised while 25 have 
got the rippled surface. That this rippling of the surface was regarded as 
decorative is apparent from the fact that out of 12 rim fragments among the 
25 rippled sherds 2 have got the rippling also on the inside of the out-turned 
rim, and of the 2, one has got the rippling omitted on the less noticeable 
corresponding outside of its wide out-turned rim. 

At this high level we already have indications that we are near the end 
of the neolithic series. In the Third Magazine in the sixth metre among the 
rim-fragments were several of cups which are prototypes in form of the 
typical painted Kamares cups of the immediately succeeding period. One 
fragment of the bottom with part of the side of such a cup, shown PI. IV, 18, 
was remarkable for the careful levigation of its grey-coloured clay, its thinness 
of section and the brilliant almost glaze-like lustre of its fine black hand- 
polished surface. In the corresponding metre in the W. Court test-pit 2 
fragments of common painted hand-made Kamares cups actually occur. 


΄ 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS, 161 


With the seventh metre from the virgin soil the deposit of the test-pit 
in the Third Magazine comes to an end just at the floor-level of the palace. 
The formidable depth of the Knossos deposit as a whole will be best realized 
if we remember that to these seven metres have to be added the two-and-half 
metres of palace deposit above the floor already excavated before the pit was 
sunk. As the intervening ‘ Kamares’ deposit not represented in the test-pit 
was apparently removed in the process of levelling away the top of the hill 
which we know preceded the laying of the foundations of the palace, we can 
safely reckon the entire deposit at this central part of the site as representing 
a depth of 10-11 metres. The pottery of this seventh metre in the Third 
Magazine still belongs to the matured and best neolithic time. Here out of 
56 fragments 6 were incised, and the continued popularity of the rippled 
ware was shown by the fact that 7 fragments had the rippled surface. Of the 
incised fragments two were remarkable as representing a twig with leaves on 
each side. In the one case the stem was rendered by means of an incised 
line, in the other case by a ridge or relief-line. On each side of the stem was 
a row of small oblong punctuated points which were filled out with white 
chalk. Considering that here in the mature neolithic period, in a style that 
is essentially geometric, we already have attempts at the rendering of plant- 
motives we need not be surprised to find such motives recurring later right 
at the beginning of the painted series, 

The fragments incised and those with rippled surface reproduced on PI. IV, 
give some idea of the kind of ware in vogue in this mature neolithic period. 
Even from the fragments it is apparent that the great majority of finer sherds 
are of bowls and cups, and here again we have an anticipation of some of the 
predominant forms of the succeeding period with whose predilection for bowl 
and especially cup-forms, we shall become acquainted Jater. The fragmentary 
condition of all this enormous mass of pottery Knossos has in common with 
all inhabited neolithic sites as distinguished from tomb-deposits. No accurate 
inventory of forms is possible until a sufficient number of representative 
neolithic tombs have been opened in Crete. 

3. In taking leave of the deposit from the test-pit in the Third Magazine 
we do not yet take leave of the neolithic series, for the deposit of the test»pit 
in the W. Court, unlike that of the other, is continuous to the surface. We 
have already seen that here two fragments of common painted ‘ Kamares’ 
cups were found in the sixth metre. This is in itself an indication that at 
this level there comes to be a discrepancy between the deposit of the one pit 
and that of the other. In the seventh metre in the W. Court test-pit there 
were 667 fragments in all and of these only 97 were neolithic. Of these 
again none were incised and none had the rippled surface so characteristic of 
the mature neolithic period. We are here already in the age of decline, 
whereas with the deposit of the seventh metre in the test-pit of the Third 
Magazine neolithic pottery is still seen at its best. The explanation is that 
the formation of deposit was more rapid and accordingly greater in quantity, 
especially at the best neolithic period, at the centre of the Knossos Hill than 
towards the periphery. Thus we have actually found that the greater the 

H.S,— VOL, XXII, M 


162 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


distance from this centre the shallower the deposit—with the eighth metre 
the deposit of the W. Court test-pit comes to the surface, the total deposit 
in the region of the Third Magazine only comes to an end with the tenth and 
eleventh metre. 

If we try to find the cause of the somewhat sudden decline noticeable in 
the deposit of the seventh metre of the W. Court test-pit, we shall not be 
too far wrong if we attribute it to the inauguration of the new paint- 
media; and in point of fact out of the total of 667 fragments, while only 97 
were neolithic, 289 were painted, and of these at least 31 were direct 
imitations, in a more or less lustrous black varnish surface, of the hand- 
polished neolithic wares. We cannot, it is true, be quite certain that because 
at this level hand-polished and painted fragments occurred in the same 
deposit they are absolutely contemporary in date ; yet just at the end of the 
neolithic time it is reasonable to conclude that there must have been a real 
overlapping of the two techniques, the old and new, corresponding to the 
actual overlapping noticeable in the deposit. In this case it would have been 
the neolithic people themselves who inaugurated the change, and the fact 
would thus be accounted for that the highest stage of development is notice- 
able near the end of the neolithic series, and that there is no sign of a falling 
off in power previous to the time when the paint-technique was invented. 

We have already mentioned that certain neolithic forms anticipate 
favourite ones in the early painted series, also that certain motives, such as the 
rippled surface, actually survived with a new lease of life in the new medium 
of lustrous glaze. Such facts are, however, particular incidents in the most 
fundamental fact of all, namely, that the at first almost lustreless but 
increasingly more and more lustrous black glaze slip, that now appears for 
the first time in the same deposit as the latest neolithic fabrics, is a direct 
imitation of the black hand-polished neolithic surfaces, and that the white 
painted on this may probably prove to be even chemically the same pigment 
as the neolithic chalk, just as it is used to produce the same decorative effect 
of pale design on a dark ground.® 

That the story told by the deposit of the seventh metre is a consistent 
one is shown by the fact that in the eighth metre also out of a total of 532 
fragments 79 belonged to the neolithic series while of the others no fewer 
than 198 were painted, 69 of these being of the typical Kamares cup. 

We thus take leave of the neolithic fabrics right at the threshold of the 
great period inaugurated with the first appearance of lustrous and lustre- 
less paints. The great depth of the deposit whose contents we have 
examined is in itself a guarantee of a very long history. The evidence 
afforded by the deposit is in this respect in harmony with what has been 
found elsewhere in the Aegean itself, and also with recent discoveries further 
afield, more particularly in Egypt. If as is probable the view is right that 
the early Aegean people are one in origin with the Libyan race of prehistoric 


6 The neolithic white pigment isaccordingto saurer Kalk.’ Zeitschr. fiir Ethnol.¥1883, 451, 
Virchow ‘bald krystallinischer, bald kohlen- 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 163 


Egypt, then it is likely that the beginnings of the two civilizations—the 
Aegean and the Libyo-Egyptian—are more or less synchronous. The 
beginnings of the prehistoric Libyan civilization of Egypt have, however, 
been found, as a result of the recent researches referred to, to go back to a 
remote pre-dynastic period. Petrie suggests the era about 7000 B.c. as the 
probable time when the Libyan race made its first appearance in the Nile- 
: valley. Τὺ is also probable that while this Libyan race was developing its 
ey. _ black-topped style of pottery in Egypt the allied neolithic people of the 
+ Aegean, in a wider European context, were creating the peculiar style of 
black hand-polished ware typical, for that early period, of the Aegean. Well 
on in this neolithic epoch must come the Egyptian-looking black-topped ware 
found in copper-age tombs in Cyprus, whose significance in this connection 
was first pointed out by Furtwiingler (Antike Gemmen, iii. 22) as being a new 
indication of race connection between the Egypt and the East Mediterranean 
of that period, and of a northward movement of the Libyan race of Egypt 
consequent upon and caused by the first appearance of the Egyptians 
proper in the Nile-land. If, as is likely, this northward movement began 
before the Aegean civilization had attained to such consistency in itself 
and such influence outwards as could have had any definite echo in Egypt, 
then we should have sufficient explanation of the fact that of imported 
remains in Egypt none from the Aegean region go back to this early period. 
Thus the imported black hand-polished ware with incised pattern filled 
with white, found in the cemeteries of Abadiyeh and Hu, all clearly belongs 
to a later period in this neolithic epoch, that inaugurated by the use of 
geometric white-filled incised design on the dark hand-polished ground in 
the Aegean region and its European and Asiatic periphery. The earliest 
of this more advanced class of neolithic ware goes back to the latter half of 
the pre-dynastic period. In Egypt, again, it is also found in dynastic times 
in its genuine neolithic character in tombs of the Ist., the I1Ird., and 
apparently the XIIth. Dynasties.’ At Knossos this advanced neolithic 
ware is still found at its best, as we have seen, almost at the very end of 
the series, just at the time-point when varnish and paint made their first 
appearance. This must have been during the time of the last Dynasties 
_ preceding the XIIth., for by the time of the XIIth. Dynasty the use of 
' yarnish and colour is proved by the imported Cretan pottery found in 
Egypt itself to have already become developed into an elaborate poly- 
chrome style.® Thus also Tsountas, Ed. ᾿Αρχ. 1898, 204, gave a-some- 
what belated chronology when he suggested the latter half of the third 
millennium B.C. for the culmination of the Cycladic civilization. It had 
probably reached its decline by that time. 
If we compare the neolithic ware of the mature period from Knossos 
_ (PI. IV, especially the fragments with punctuated bands and vandykes) with 
th ay pottery found in Egypt (Diospolis Parva, Pls. Frontispiece, Class 
 NLIL BxY, Neguie, eee ἼΩΝ be at once apparent that the two wares 


8 Petrie in J.H.S, xi. 275—6. Pl. xiv. 


164 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


come into the same context. If this pottery came from the Aegean then it 
has certainly more analogy with the mature neolithic pottery of Knossos 
than with that of any other known Aegean site. The only disturbing fact 
is that Petrie reports similar pottery from ‘pan-graves’ of Libyans in 
the XIIIth. Dynasty and on to the XVIIth. and XVIIIth. At Knossos 
all the evidence goes against the possibility that such ware continued to 
be produced there even as late as the XIIth. Dynasty. And the actual 
Cretan ware above referred to found in Egypt in deposit belonging to the 
period of the XIIth. Dynasty affords proof that by that period the potters - 
of Knossos had already developed an elaborate polychrome style of pottery.” 
Further the evidence from the test-pit deposits of Knossos goes to show 
that this painted style must have been created considerably before that 
period. Thus the conclusion about the black incised pottery found by 
Petrie in XIIIth. XVIIth. and XVIIIth. Dynasty tombs in Egypt is that it 
cannot be from Crete or the Aegean itself at all, but from some outlying 
peripheral region where, as at Troy, the Anatolian, and probably the 
Libyo-African coast-lands, black incised and unincised ware continued in 
vogue long after a painted style had been created in the Aegean.!° 

On the other hand the ware of this late neolithic period has analogies 
with the pottery of the cist-cemeteries of the Cyclades which indicate that 
both are contemporary appearances. The articulation of typical vase-forms 
in both cases goes back to early metal shapes which are themselves an indi- 
cation that the genuine neolithic stage of development is now being left 
behind. Equally characteristic in both cases is the direct relation of ante- 
cedence to the first inauguration of painted design which marks the com- 
mencement of a new era equally in Crete and in the Cyclades. In Crete as 
in the Cyclades the first stage in the new development is marked by an 
imitation in paint of the incised schemes of decoration inherited from the 
neolithic period. This imitation involves an initial contemporaneity of the 
late incised with the early painted schemes of decoration which is fully borne 
out by the discoveries both in ‘the Cyclades and in Crete. In the later 
phases of this geometric development the neolithic technique of incision is 
found to have fallen into disuse. 


II.—The Pottery of the Minoan Period. 


1. Right at the beginning of the painted series we have to start with 
the fact mentioned already that a certain proportion (31 out of 289) of the 


9 Petrie, Kahun and Gurob. Pl. 27, Illahun 
Kahun and Gurob, Pl. 1. J.H.S. xi. Pl. xiv, 
5—10. 

10 The use of the potter’s wheel and oven at 
Troy as carly as the second period represented 
in the Second stratum of itself excludes the 
whole of the neolithic looking pottery of this 
stratum from the genuine neolithic series and 
assigns it to a post-neolithic date. See Troja 
und Ilion, 254, © 


When the great prehistoric mounds of Kolo- 
phon and elsewhere in the Anatolian coast- 
region have come to be systematically explored, 
the analogy with prehistoric Troy in this 
respect will probably turn out to be complete. 
The results of exploration in the Libyo-African 
coast-lands may similarly prove to be in harmony 
with the ‘neolithic’ evidence from XIIIth. 
XVIIth, and XVIIIth. Dynasty tombs in 
Egypt. 


are lustreless, Here then there does not exist a style of pure ‘ mattmalerei’ 


Ὁ THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 165 
painted fragments that occurred in the same deposit as the latest neolithic 


- sherds was a direct imitation of the black hand-polished ware itself. It is 


important now to put on record the further fact that the painted fragments 
above referred to, like all the neolithic fabrics, were themselves hand-made. 
The ‘clay, however, is now of a terracotta or brick colour in contrast to the 
peaty grey of the neolithic wares. The finer varieties have their clay care- 
fully sifted, and the fragments when dropped give a clink like that of 
‘Mycenaean’ ware. This latter feature in combination with the brick colour 
of the clay affords an indication that now the potter’s oven, not in evidence 


for the previous period, is already in use. 


Two technical characteristics are observable. 1. The imitation of the 
black hand-polished ware, which at the same time is the primary differ- 
entiating feature of the painted series, consists in the use of a more or less 
lustrous black glaze medium as a slip spread over the surface of the clay— 
on both sides usually if the vessel is of wide open shape, on the outside only 
if the vessel has a narrowed neck—to produce a general effect similar to that 
of the neolithic black hand-polished surface. The coarser fragments often 
have the varnish almost lustreless, the surfaces of the finer fragments are 
apparently more favourable to the preservation of the glaze lustre. On a 
certain number of fragments with this medium broad bands in lustreless 
cream-white, possibly the old chalk medium, appear on the dark glaze 
ground. On these early painted fragments the design-colour as in the neo- 
lithic inlays is white and more rarely vermilion. We have thus here, right 
at the beginning of the painted series, the first rudiments of the Minoan style 
with light design on a dark ground. 2. Alongside of these fragments occurs 
another class equally hand-made and with perfectly similar clay, in which 
the glaze medium is taken as the design-colour in the shape of bands 
appearing black on the buff ground of the clay. Here then we have equally 
right at the beginning of the painted series what is usually regarded as the 
characteristically ‘Mycenaean’ technique with lustrous dark design on a 
pale ground. 

The synchronous origin of the two styles—light design on a dark ground 
and dark design on a light ground—is a fact of superlative importance in its 
bearing on the question as to the origin of the later ‘Mycenaean’ style. In 
Furtwiingler and Loeschke’s classification, Myk. Vasen vi—viii., wares with 
‘mattmalerei’ are set down at the beginning of the painted series and as on 
the whole earlier than those with lustrous paint. In the class of vases 
with glaze again those of the first style with light design on a dark ground 
are regarded as on the whole earlier than those of the second style with dark 
design on a light ground. At Knossos, as we shall see, the two latter styles 
originate together and alongside of the first. use of lustreless design-colours 
on the flat, for in Crete all colours except the lustrous glaze medium itself 


lating a period when the lustrous glaze medium itself came into 
. Ne ther, δον penn is there such a style contemporary with 


100 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


have two glaze styles contemporary with each other and at the same time 
contemporary with a style in lustreless colours, not in Crete itself but in the 
rest of the Aegean and the adjoining Greek mainland. 

The original relation of the two styles to each other can best be under- 
stood by examination of a class of vessels richly represented in this layer— 
we mean the common painted ‘ Kamares’ cups already referred to and illus- 
trated in Fig. 1 (those in rouleaux below) along with other types of vases 
belonging to the same context. Out of the 667 fragments of the seventh 


metre W. Court test-pit, 86 were of the particular kind of cup referred to. . 


These cups, in contradistinction to the common unpainted ‘ Mycenaean’ cups 
of a later period, have along with their paint decoration a deep high shape. 
The cups have either a flattened bottom (32 specimens) or they have a short 
rolled-out ring-foot (54). Sometimes the foot is merely pinched out sharp (7). 
It is characteristic of many of the variety without foot that the lower part 
of the cup is got into the desired narrowed shape by being pared vertically 
all round the base before firig with some sharp instrument. Thus some 
(6) of the cups have a rough polygonal contour below. A later plain variety 
has then the lower part pinched out into a variation of the polygonal contour 
by means of the five finger-tips, after which the bottom is flattened out 
and widened into a foot. Of the footless. cups 19 bottom-fragments have a 
slightly lustrous brown-black glaze slip on which has to be assumed 
round the rim a broad band in lustreless cream-white. That is to say, we 
have here the rudiments of technique 1 in its simplest form. Of the foot- 
less cups once more, 13 showed the buff ground of the clay, on which has to 
be assumed above round the rim a broad band in lustrous brown-black 
glaze. Here then we have the rudiments of technique 2. Sometimes, 
however, the broad glaze band has over it a narrower band in lustreless 
cream-white, that is, the rudiments of a synthesis of both styles which itself 
has also a later history. Of rim-fragments (19) corresponding to though 
not fitting these bottoms, some showed the band in lustreless white, some 
again the band in lustrous black glaze. The eighth and last metre 
repeated the story told by the seventh metre. Here out of a total of 69 
fragments of ‘Kamares’ cups 33 were rim-fragments. These fragments had 
either a broad band under the rim in lustreless cream-white on a brown- 
black slightly lustrous glaze slip or a broad band in brown-black slightly 
lustrous glaze on the buff ground of the clay. 

Of the whole deposit represented by the finds from these two last layers 
nothing could more clearly demonstrate the completely pre-Mycenaean cha- 
racter as a whole than the fact that alongside of these typically Minoan cups, 
themselves in such abundance, not one specimen of the common unpainted 
cups of crude squat form so characteristic of all ‘ Mycenaean’ deposits occurred. 
All other definitely Mycenaean fabrics were equally conspicuous by their 
absence. The fact, however, that the deposit of this pit ends at the surface 
without containing finds of distinctly ‘Mycenaean’ character is in itself 
remarkable. The explanation is that the surface here sloping down west is 
coincident with the pavement level of the W. Court. The lower strata 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 167 


at least of the Kamares deposit here, in contrast with that of the test-pit of 
the Third Magazine, which being near the summit came to be removed entirely 


14 


13 


11 


Fic. 1. 


10 


in the process of levelling away preparatory to the laying of the Palace floors, 
remained undisturbed and came up to the floor. Above that floor-level again, 


168 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


in this region represented by the pavement of a public square, the deposit 
contained, as was to be expected, no finds at all.” 

While, however, in the case of the test-pits on which we have hitherto 
relied we can in a general way be fairly certain that the painted ware found 
in the same deposit with the latest neolithic fabrics must belong to the earlier 
stages of the painted series, we cannot be quite so certain even in the case 
of the W. Court test-pit how much if any of the deposit came to be 
removed, and so whether or not the whole of the deposit is early. For this 
reason we are able to obtain from that deposit only the main primary features 
of the early painted series as a whole in relation to what went before and 
also to what followed. For such land-marks between earlier and later as are 
afforded by the existence of floor-levels in the deposit we must look elsewhere. 
And the special lesson taught by the absence, from causes already stated, 
of post-neolithic deposit in the test-pit of the Third Magazine and its 
presence in the W. Court test-pit was that such evidence was to be sought 
away from the central regions of the palace. We were therefore not 
surprised when we found that the data we wanted were forthcoming in the 
terrace regions connected with the East Wing of the palace. Most important 
in this respect were the regions of the Spiral-fresco and the N.E. and 8.E. 
Kamares areas.'” 

In these localities the deposit begins with neolithic remains above the 
virgin soil and comes up to well-marked Minoan floors. These floors in the 
case of the area of the Spiral-fresco may be later and probably belong to a 
palace of the Middle Minoan Period. Of this early deposit in the case of the 
area of the Spiral-fresco and of the next area W. of it, that of the Room of 
the Olive Press, a record was kept according to metres. As a whole, however, 
in view of the steepness of the slope and the amount of building that went 
on here from an early period, the formation of deposit cannot be expected to 
have been so regular or so undisturbed as it was in the case of the more 
level and at the same time more outlying region of the W. Court. Reckoning 
from the virgin soil there were four metres of deposit altogether up to the 
level of the Minoan floor. This deposit was almost entirely neolithic from 
the first metre upwards and in a general way it could be said that the first 
metre which contained no painted fragments must be earlier than the second, 
_ third, and fourth which contained painted sherds in very small but increasing 
proportions. The earliest painted fragments in the second metre (Room of 
the Olive Press) happened, however, to be of wheel-made ‘Kamares’ cups, 
and probably had got down into earlier deposit than they belonged to. 
Again in the fourth metre, that immediately underlying the Kamares floor, 
neolithic ware is still so largely predominant that out of 512 fragments 445 
were neolithic, while only 67 were ‘ Kamares’ painted and unpainted. This, 


1 A solitary exception in the way of frag- adequately explained (B.S. A. vii. 51), by the 
ments of vases in the Palace style found in derivation of the fragments from rooms formerly 
ceposit in the W. Court along the outer existing above the adjacent magazines. 
edge of the West Wall of the building is 12 B.S.A, viii. 


π΄] ΤΕ POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. . 169 


in combination with the fact that the neolithic fabrics nowhere give any 
indication of decline, points to the possibility that some of the upper deposit 
had got removed preparatory to the laying of foundations and floors. Thus 
once more we cannot be certain that we possess the data complete up to 
the time of the construction of the floor. On the other hand the existence 
of the floor itself is guarantee that the painted ware as a whole found 
beneath it is earlier than the ware found above it, and thus the floor forms 
a landmark in the Minoan Epoch by means of which we are able to different- 
iate an earlier period from a more mature one in the history of Minoan 
pottery. The results are in this respect in accordance with the evidence 
that was forthcoming elsewhere. ‘Thus we find the common painted 
τς ἢ Kamares’ cup once more belonging to the early painted series, and although 
from the condition of the deposit we cannot say how early occurs the first 
use of the wheel, of which there are the marks on these cup-fragments, we 
ean be certain that this must have occurred in this early period at some 
time or other previous to the laying of the foundations and floors which 
mark for us a more mature epoch. Again the early origin of the painted 
ware with ripple-motive previously referred to (p. 160, and PI. IV, 1-5) was once 
more shown by the fact that a fragment of a cup or small bowl, wheel-made 
with the ripple-motive on the inside, occurred in the deposit underneath the 
‘Kamares’ floor in the third metre. That the occurrence was not accidental 
was shown by the fact that in the fourth metre also there was a fragment 
of a bowl, also wheel-made, with the same motive. The early occurrence 
once more of this curious kind of decoration is in accordance with the 
᾿ς view set forth above, that the painted ware with ripple-motive is a direct 
imitation of the rippled and hand-polished neolithic pottery which was so 
favourite a fabric in the preceding era. General characteristics are once 
more in harmony with these particular facts. Thus though the proportions 
are still small (67 out of 512 fragments) the fourth metre, that immediately 
underlying the ‘Minoan’ floor, shows the use of lustrous black glaze in 
imitation of neolithic black hand-polish already inaugurated, and fragments 
with more or less lustrous black glaze slip, with or without band-design, 
alternate with fragments having bands in lustrous black glaze on the buff 
‘ground of the clay. 

Attention has already been called to the appearance of painted geometric 
imitations of black, hand-polished, white-filled, incised, neolithic ware, of 
which a characteristic fragment was already published by Hogarth-Welch, 
J.H.S. xxi. 97, Fig. 31, with light design on a dark ground. In an early 
Minoan chamber on the E. Slope good specimens of this were found in which 
the white geometric pattern is helped out by subsidiary vermilion. A 
parallel to this phenomenon is seen in the occurrence of pre-historic painted 

metric ware with dark design ona light ground. In the Room of the Olive 
Fe in the deposit immediately underlying the Minoan floor, that is, in 
pe fart. metre, there were-six fragments of this early geometric fabric. 
Β > ἴῃ question has hatched pattern in the form of dice or triangles, 
groups of narrow geometric bands which going obliquely 


ce 7 Ἢ 


170 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


sometimes cross each other so as to form a central net-work lozenge at either 
side of the vessel, in lustrous, sometimes only half-lustrous, red-brown glaze 
on a buff, sometimes pale yellow-grey, clay slip on terracotta red clay.’ 
The ware is always hand-made at the beginning of the painted series. An 
early painted geometric style with dark design on a light ground is known 
from other sites, though, as far as known to be native, without the lustrous 
glaze which is typical of the Cretan fabric. In Melos a pre-historic geo- 
metric style is, indeed, at one period so characteristic as to be the typical one 
at the beginning of the painted series. In these the design is painted in 
lustreless black on a white 5110. Certain early fragments with geometric — 
pattern in lustrous varnish are in this respect so much out of harmony with 
the context in which they occur in Melos that they can hardly be native and 
may very well be from Crete. On the other hand at Knossos certain 
fragments from other parts of the site having geometric design in lustreless 
black paint on a light ground so much resemble the pre-historic geo- 
metric ware of Phylakopi as to be almost certainly Melian. The Cretan style 
of lustrous geometric ware, while particularly characteristic of the earliest 
Minoan age, survives into a period in which the use of the wheel has become 
universal. Thus wheel-made as well as hand-made varieties of the common 
Minoan cup are often decorated in this style. The ‘sheep-bell’ vases (Fig. 
1, Nos. 1, 2) in the same style are a curious sub-species of the kind of cup 
referred to. 

From the- deposits beneath the ‘Kamares’ floors the general result is 
thus once more obtained that for the early series we have either (1) lustre- 
less cream-white design on a lustrous black glaze slip, or (2) design in 
lustrous brown-black glaze on the buff ground of the clay; that is to say, 
once more, the early rudiments of two painted styles originating together 
and having respectively (1) light design on a dark ground, and (2) dark 
design on a light ground. 

2. Above the floors of the First Palace in all the regions where these 
occur the deposit was found to belong rather abruptly to the finest Minoan 
epoch, and the two simple styles of the Early Minoan Period are seen developed 
respectively into an elaborate polychrome and a simpler but equally mature 
monochrome style. The explanation of this phenomenon is one that may be 
generalised into a law for all undisturbed floor-deposits, to wit, that house- 
floors being regularly swept do not contain a deposit record of the whole 
period, during which the floored space was used but only of the close of that 


18 B.S.A. iv. 41. 

14. Ib, 40. If the painted geometric sherds 
from Tell el-Hesy, which have heen assigned 
with considerable probability to the Aegean, 
really have a lustrous glaze, then those also 
may be of Cretan provenance. Jb. 41. 

A painted geometric vase from Zakro, with 
cylindrical neck and angular shoulder having 
two suspension handles, has its shape and sug- 
gestions of a metal proto-type in common with 


a similar incised sub-neolithic vase from the 
same deposit. This instance is in harmony 
with the evidence from the Cyclades, where, as 
in Melos, at the beginning of the painted 
series incised and painted geometric wares occur 
side by side. 

15 The beaked can, Mariani Mon. ant. det 
Lincei, vi. Pl. X. 28, belongs probably to the 
later geometric class. 85, Evans, H. Onuphrios 
Deposit in Cretan Pictographs, 114, Fig. 13» 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 171 


period when the floored area for whatever reason came to be abandoned, and 
that as a rule there is a record of the final period itself only if the abandon- 
ment has been an enforced and sudden one. A quiet flitting would never 
have left behind it the series of beautiful vessels, more or less complete, in 
fragments found on these Minoan floors. The missing data necessary towards 
filling up the gap in the evidence can only be supplied by waste-heaps or 
tombs belonging to the period not represented in its entirety by, the deposit 
_ on the floor itself but only in its final stage. Meanwhile we must content our- 
selves with what we know of this Middle Minoan pottery in its full maturity 
and cannot profess to describe the steps by which the early parallel styles, with 


light design on a dark ground and with dark design on a light ground, came 
i to be developed into the elaborate polychrome and monochrome styles of 
‘ which we have such ample evidence on these Minoan floors. Bright orange- 


tinted red, which occasionally occurs on neolithic incised ware,!® seems to 
form the earliest companion to white, and the earliest step in the polychrome 
direction. How the later colours came in which produced a developed poly- 
chrome style we cannot say. We only know that above floors of the Middle 
Minoan period, universally indeed in the case of those adjacent to or within 
the area covered by the palace, polychrome design with lustreless white, 
yellow, orange, red, crimson on a lustrous black varnish ground, in constant 
company with an equally mature monochrome style with design in lustrous 
black varnish (usually) on a fine buff clay slip, is seen all at once as a fatt 
accompli. 

That, however, the polychrome was the more favourite style of the two 
was evident from the fact that universally in the deposit it was found 
that vessels on which special pains had been bestowed were in this ia ως, 
This is the so-called ‘ Kamares’ ware in its purest form. 

The types which illustrate the finest Minoan technique may be classified 
thus :— 


I. Cups. 1. Vaphio or Kefti shape, (a) with straight or slightly concave 
sides and angular contours, (Ὁ) with double-curve sides and rounded contours. 
2. Tall flower-pot shape with and without handle. 3. Tea-cup shape, one- 
handled large and small. 4, Bowl types. 

II. Vessels with different varieties of beak-spouts. 1. Two-handled 
beaked jugs and jars. 2. One-handled, sometimes three-handled, beaked cans. 
See J.H.S. xxi. 84-88, Figs. 14, 7, 8,9. Pl. VI. a, ὃ, 6. 

III. 1. Jugs of the modern oinochoe type, id. 86, Figs. 10, 4... R Am- 
phorae or two-handled jars, ib. Figs. 12, 13. 

IV. Fruit-stand vases of the type. illustrated, id. Figs. 15, 16. 


= Of these types by far the most common is that in the first class of 
P ou, and pabong these the ‘tea-cup’ shape. The rarest type of vase is that 


τ δ Already in the second metre from the incised neolithic ἐπε had traces of red 
virgin oil in the ie ae the live, Press sn _ filling. , 


172 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


in the fourth class. The ‘ tea-cup’ style of vase is at the same time that in 
which form and decoration attain to the greatest refinement. 

Examination of a typical lot of fragments will give some idea of the vast 
disproportion in numbers between cups of the different shapes and all other 
kinds of vessels. Thus in one such lot, out of 187 rim-fragments examined, 
173 belonged to fine Minoan cups. Out of 71 bottoms, 61 were of different 
types of cup, while only 9 belonged to larger vessels such as beaked jugs and 
cans. When we come to handles we have the same tale. Out of 52 handles 
45 belonged to painted cups of the different types, while only 7 belonged 
to beaked jugs. Of sherds fractured all round, again, out of 519 examined 
no fewer than 500 belonged to the different types of Minoan cups. 

That the cup type of vase was the most favoured in the Great Minoan 
period is, however, shown not only by the quantities produced, but by the 
quality of the workmanship. For proof one has only to turn to Pl. V. where. 
some of the best specimens are reproduced in colour. All three belong to 
the ‘ tea-cup’ type of vase of rather large size. The design, in the polychrome 
style, in lustreless cream-white, with details in lustreless red, appears in all 
three specimens on a highly lustrous black glaze slip, which in the case of 
vase 2 has a rich olive-brown tint, all on pale finely sifted terracotta clay 
of a section so thin as to remind one of the best Venetian glass.” 

The most elaborate design is that of vase 1 with its elegant combination 
of rosette and tailed spirals. It is easy to conceive the side rosettes 
embossed on metal originals. As we shall see below, the potter sometimes 
actually reproduces such relief. As regards the colour effect generally in such 
examples, the richness and harmony are largely owing to the fact that the, 
pigments used give tones of the respective colours. Thus white appears as a 
beautiful cream tint, the red has a touch of orange or terracotta, while the 
crimson emerges with a cherry tint, recalling that of a rich red wine. Not 
only so, but the lustrous dark background varies with almost every vase. In 
the case of vases 1 and 3, for example, the glaze background has a brilliant 
black metallic lustre, in the case.of 2 it is a rich brown with an olive tint, in 
other examples a harmonious shade of purple-black is so common as almost 
certainly to have been intended when once under certain conditions it had 
been produced perhaps as the result of accident. 

In the early period of this technique, going back as it does on neolithic 
traditions, it is probable that geometric motives were the most common 
though not the only ones. In the mature period, geometric and curvilinear 
designs exist side by side. Examples of such geometric decoration are the 
vases reproduced in colour on Pl. VI. 1,2. Both are of the tall flower-pot 


17 The vases are thinner in section than 
appears on the plate because it is impossible in 
colour and with the brush to reproduce so fine 
a section. 

8 The tailed spiral occurs in lustreless colour 
in the first grave at Mycenae, see F. and L. 
Myth. Thongef. p. 3 1. 8. For another frag- 


ment in ‘matt’ colour from Mycenae, see F. 
and Τὶ, Myk. Vas. 54, 55, and Fig. 33. The 
tailed spiral motive was a favourite space-filling 
device also in fresco-painting probably at this 
and certainly at a later period, see B.S. A.. vii. 
87. Fyfe, in Jowrnal of the Royal Institute of 
British Architects, p. 121, Figs. 45, 46. 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 173 


type without handle. The vase on Pl. VI. 1 has a fairly large base and is of 
normally thin section. VI. 2, has an extremely small base and very thin 
section. In the case of the former the lustrous brown-to-black glaze slip 
covers outside and inside, in the case of VI. 2 the slip forms a rim-band 
on the inside, the rest of which has brush spray-spots in lustreless white, 
red, and lustrous black. The mellow colour effect speaks for itself, and it 
has only to be remarked that the variations from brown to black of the 
lustrous varnish slip are, as so often, partly the result of irregularities in the 
firing, partly the outcome of a combination of the tint of the glaze with that 
of the underlying buff ground of the clay, which appears through the semi- 
transparency of the glaze where that is laid on thin. 

Perhaps the finest cup in the polychrome style is that reproduced in colour 
Pl. VI. 3. The vase, like all the others, was fitted up out of fragments. 
Many parts, including the whole of the rim and handle, are wanting. In this 
case an elaborate water-lily design starts from a crimson centre in the middle of 
the base in alternate radiating lustreless white and red lines. The white lines 
on the body of the vase become petals, the red ones meeting over the petals 
in a complicated design border these above. The tops of the petals and the 
edge of the design above are stamped out into very low relief in imitation of 
repoussé metal work. The design appears ona highly lustrous black, at parts 
brown-black, glaze slip—repeated on the inside—on very fine dull grey clay 
of extremely thin section. The decorative fitness of this design, in its union 
of quiet, harmonious colour-effect with the graceful outlines merging into low 
relief on the marvellously delicate clay, produces an impression of correctly 
elegant refinement so truly classic as to be almost Greek. 

Into the same context with these vases comes the series of selected 
polychrome fragments, all from the S.E. Kamares area, figured in colour on PI. 
VII. All but one of the specimens are again apparently of cups. These cups 
show the usual variations in shape according to the curve of the sides. The 
decoration is again extremely characteristic. There are the usual colours— 


-lustreless cream or cream-white, yellow, orange, red, crimson, all on a highly 


lustrous black, purple-black, brown-black, metallic grey-black glaze slip 
on fine terracotta-red clay, which sometimes has a buff clay slip allowed in 
certain schemes of decoration to appear as part of the design. ) 
The vase with low relief, VI. 3, fittingly introduces us to the class of 
‘ Kamares’ vases in which relief-work comes to the aid of colour to enhance 
the elaborate effect of light polychrome design on a dark ground. By far the 
greatest number of vase-fragments in this manner were found in the S.E. 
Kamares area. The best fairly complete example in this style was that 
found by Mr. Hogarth in the south suburb of Knossos and illustrated in colour 
J.H.S. xxi, Pl. VI. a. From the palace-region we have not been able as yet 
to fit up any fairly complete specimens, but from the quantity of fragments 
discovered it is clear that this variety in relief shared an equal popularity 
with the other, and at its best-had reached the same level of elaboration if 
not of refinement in colour-effect. Except, however, where the relief is mere 


_ imitation of repoussé work, as in the case of the vase described above, the section 


174 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


never reaches the same extreme of thinness as in the varieties painted in the 
flat. It is probable that most of the relief work is in origin an imitation of 
metal-relief and that clay-forms came later to be treated in the same way. 
At any rate one must not expect too much consistency, for the metal proto- 
types are often themselves imitations of clay forms, so that the relief-work in 
which it imitates metal technique may do so apart from any indication of the 
fact in the mere form. There is no doubt, however, that the metallic origin is 
more apparent, even from the fragments, in the case of those with relief-work 
than in the case of those which have none. In the orie set, rounded shapes pre- 
dominate, in the other sharp turned down rims, convex and concave curves, 
connected by abrupt transitional angles marking joinings in metal prototypes, 
are the order of the day. The colour part of the technique is the same 
whether there is relief or not. Relief only comes in to aid colour in pro- 
ducing a more elaborate surface effect with the addition of light and shade, 
The most favourite relief-device is the toothed or bossed band, which as a unit 
by repetition is used to produce a complex surface pattern in the same way 
as a coloured or incised band. Thus we have parallel bands, zig-zag bands, 
hatched lozenges. Curved bands also occur, though these are rarer. The whole 
relief-work is usually covered by a black, more frequently purple-black, lustrous 
glaze slip on which in the intervals between the relief-work the different 
colours are laid. This relief-technique seems to have been the more favourite 
one for all kinds of vessels other than drinking ones such as bowls and cups, 
in the case of which elaborate relief-work must have been avoided because 
inconvenient. ‘This consideration will be sufficient to deter us from regarding 
the vases with relief-work as belonging necessarily to a later development, 
‘They are of course strictly contemporary with those in the flat found in the 
same context with them. Only for reasons of convenience the relief-work is 
usually restricted to types of vases in the case of which the addition of the relief 
is not a drawback. Thus it is that by far the greater number of vases in this 
style belong to our classes II, III, IV, above. The most curious and rare 
examples of such relief-work are, perhaps those in Class IV of ‘ fruit-stand ’ 
vases. See Fig.2. The effect of the lustreless cream-white, yellow, red, deep 
crimson, in combination with the relief-work, on the lustrous purple black slip 
on a clay surface purposely left rough, is unusually rich in its quiet brilliancy. 
In such examples we have the most elaborate effect that could be achieved by 
the polychrome technique, and at the same time all that most distinguishes 
the polychrome ceramics of the Minoan people from the monochrome style that 
begins to dominate at a later time. As characteristic of this Minoan poly- 
chrome style, whether in the flat or in relief, the decorative feeling for colour- 
effect, as apart from mere imitation of natural combinations of colour, copied 
from the flower and plant world, can never again in later times be said to have 
reached the same level in ceramic art. For anything similar in this respect 
one has to go to another technique belonging to a much later age, that of old 
Venetian glass. 

In contrast with this polychrome style the parallel technique with 
monochrome design in lustrous black or brown-black glaze on the buff 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 175 


ground of the clay, is evidently regarded as a useful short-hand method of 
decoration for quick work on more ordinary vessels. Thus it is that mono- 
chrome design could never reach so full an elaboration as the other, at a time 
when such elaboration in an architectonic sense was enforced by an awaken- 
ing genius for glowing colour, whose nearest analogies in another field we 
must seek in the inlaid metal work, the textile fabrics and the wall-paintings 
of the period. The artistic interest in ceramics at that time was to produce 
delicate and harmonious decorative effects of a polychrome character by 


leap 
χ ’ 


Ne he Se | 
aA’ 


4: | 
‘ANA AR 
rere: 


Fia.f 2. 


means of subsidiary colours such as yellow, orange, red, crimson in subordina- 
tion to the dominant cream-white on a brilliantly toned lustrous black ground. 
Thus it is that the great Minoan period yields no instances of very elaborate 
decoration in the more homely monochrome style with dark design on a light 
ground. This fact must not, however, lead us to ignore the existence of this 
technique at this period altogether, as is apt to happen when the polychrome 
ware is isolated into a class by itself and taken as characteristic of the 
period to which it is referred regardless of the complete context in which it 
occurs. The monochrome tendency on the contrary showed remarkable 
tenacity of life. The conditions encouraging survival were (1) the universal 
use as ground of the glaze medium in the polychrome style, (2) the 


176 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


durability of the medium itself in decoration as compared with the lustreless 
colour pigments, (3) convenience in practice for the potter. 

The absolute parallelism of the two styles is quite apparent from the 
test-cases which, taking all fragments indifferently from the deposit-level 
examined into account, exclude selection. Thus in the first metre above the 
‘Kamares’ floor underlying the Room of the Olive Press with 37 fragments 


Fie. 8. 


I noted of the painted sherds 9 as polychrome and 9 as monochrome. In the 
second metre again, out of 64 fragments examined, I noted 23 as polychrome, 
23 as monochrome, 3 as stray neolithic and the residue as uncharacteristic. 
If we now pass to vases more or less complete we find that we have the 
same story. A glance at Fig. 3 will convince us at once that the vases 1, 2 
of the Vaphio shape, with dark design on a light ground, belong to the same 
context as 4, which has light design on a dark ground and with 3, on which 
both techniques are seen united. This latter example only shows all the 
more clearly that both techniques were practised together and that they were 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 177 


sometimes combined to produce a new decorative effect. That there can be 
no question of a transition from the one technique to the other is evident not 
only from the fact that all these vases belong to the same deposit but also 
from the circumstances that they all belong to the same company as the poly- 
chrome vases on Pls. V. VI. 1. 3. They were all of them found in the same 
deposit on ‘ Kamares’ floors belonging to the N.E. Kamares area. A more 
curious and at the same time elaborate example of the combination of the 
two styles is VI, 4 from the S.E. Kamares Deposit. Here the foundation of 


te ee see) Pr 


πριν > A agus cai 


Fic. 4. (From B.S.A. viii.) 


the design is formed by a kind of lozenged meander bands alternating with 
single bands and figure-8 chain bands in lustrous black glaze on the fine 
buff surface of the clay. So far all seems to be monochrome until we observe 
the polychrome details in lustreless white and red which are an intrinsic 
though subordinate part of the design. Inside again is a lustrous black 
glaze slip on which inside the rim is a narrow band in lustreless vermilion. 
This vase had an equally interesting polychrome companion in the shape of 
a cup of almost exactly similar form on which, below a narrow band 
in lustreless deep crimson, the lustrous glaze itself appears, this time as 
part of the polychrome design, in the shape of dots in a series on short 
vertical bands in lustreless cream-white going round the body of the vase 
H.S.— VOL. XXIII. N 


178 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


twice at an interval, once inside. Alternate figures of 8 between the 
vertical bands are in lustreless yellow and deep crimson—all on a lustrous 
olive-tinted black glaze slip inside and out on terracotta-red clay. 

All these cups and cup-fragments are wheel-made, that is to say, in the 
Middle Minoan period, to which these cups belong, the use of the wheel, proved 
in isolated cases for the earlier period, is universal. 

That, however, the wheel was not used for all types of vessels, is an 
equally certain fact having technical reasons of its own. The two beaked 
jars Figs. 4, 5, for example, like many large vessels, were built up by hand. 


Fic. 5. (From B.S.A. viii.) 


The real interest of these vases is, however, of another kind. In the case 
of both of them the architectonic ground-work of the design is in lustreless 
cream-white on a lustrous black glaze slip. Subordinate details are in 
bright red and dark crimson ; 4 has three-fold bands, white-red-white, and 
alternate crescents, red with a crimson spot; 5 has alternate bands red, but 
always so that the red alternates architectonically with the cream-white. 
The dot-bands have smaller crimson dots on larger cream-white ones.’ The 
crescent motive in the design is of exceptional interest because it recurs on 


19 4 has ἢ, 584c. base ἃ. 17c. shoulder ἃ. shoulder d. 42c. rim ἃ. 2540. 
45c. rim ἃ. 25f7c. 5 hash. 496. base ἃ, 174c. 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 179 


some rare fragments of Minoan fresco from the same deposit.2° The spiral 


and branch motives of the vases probably also formed elements of design in 
a Minoan Palace style of decoration common to fresco-painter and potter at 
this period. The running spiral, which in combination with the rosette plays 
so large a réle on the palace dados of a subsequent age appears here already 
in full use. And the elaborate scheme of rosette and tailed spirals such as it 
appears on the polychrome vase Pl. V. 1, must equally belong to a Minoan 
Palace style and can hardly have been the property of the vase-painter 
alone. The polychrome style as a whole suggests intimate relationship with 
the art of the fresco-painter, which might be made out in other cases than 
the above, did we possess more plentiful remains of the Middle Minoan Palace 
with its decorations. 

3. The pottery just described belongs to the deposit immediately above 
the ‘Kamares’ floors and to the best Minoan period, The depth of deposit 
found to be uniform was considerable. 

For example, in the test-pit in the Room of the Olive Press classes of 
ware predominant in the first metre also recurred in the second metre. 


Much of this is to be explained by the existence of upper floors, the falling 


in of which with their contents would account for the uniformity in the 
deposit to this height. In the case of these two metres polychrome and 
monochrome vases were found in equal proportions. In the third metre, 
that immediately underlying the palace floors of the ‘Mycenaean’ period, the 
proportion of polychrome fragments happened to be higher (17 monochrome, 
27 polychrome), but in that case several of the polychrome fragments 
belonged to one vessel, so that even at this high level the proportions are 
found to be fairly equal. 

This result is important as affording warning that with the laying of 
new floors we are not to expect any abrupt transition in development 
corresponding with the gap in the continuity of the deposit above these 
floors. We have here once more only a repetition of the phenomenon 
noticeable in the case of the deposit above the floors of the Middle Minoan 
period.”! 

One mark of lateness, however, characteristic of the deposit of the 
third metre is the fact that neither here nor elsewhere, as far as on record, at 


Ὁ See Fyfe, ‘Painted Plaster Decoration at 

Knossos,’ in the Journal of the Royal Institute 

ow of British Architects, Vol. x. No. 4, p. 116, 
ip, 109, Fig. 2, restoration A. The crescent 
device is one of the most common on contem- 


early occurrence at Knossos in vase and wall- 

painting thus brings back to the great Minoan 
period the origin of the similar design in post- 
Mycenaean times. See Boehlau, Aus Jon. u. 
Cones 65, Figs. 26, 29, 30. Taf. 
8. Also in polychrome design on 


porary Melian ware, see B.S.A. v.17. The- 


with pointed leaves occurring on post-My- 
cenaean pottery, ἐδ. Taf. iii. 1 x, 17, xi. 1 “Eg. 


“Apx. 1888, 7, 2, has historic continuity with 
. the exactly similar motive on our vase. The 


Samian vase, Boehlau iii. 1, shows both. our 
erescent and our garland motive together. The 
survival or revival as the case may be is so 
faithful to tradition that even the tendency of 
the design—r. in the case of the garland, 1. in 
the case of the crescents—is repeated. The 
crescents change their direction only when they 
are repeated in a second series. 

2 See above, p. 170. 


180 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


this high level did polychrome ware of the finest quality, whether in the flat 
or in relief, occur. On the other hand there is the distinct tendency of 
polychrome desi gn itself to become monochrome, that is simple light design 
ona dark ground. Again, greater quantities of vessels, especially in Class I, 
occurred than previously with lustrous black glaze slip, or with buff clay 
slip, or ground without design. The cups in Fig. 6 are in this respect 
characteristic of the deposit to which they belong. Of these, No. 8 might 


τί 8 9 
Fic. 6. 


be taken for the common unpainted ‘Mycenaean’ cup so typical of a later 

period. The context, however, in which the cup occurs, makes it quite — 
impossible that it can be Mycenaean. It was found along with eight others 
exactly similar in ‘ Kamares’ deposit, of the N.E. Kamares area, in which ne 
single fragment could be identified as Mycenaean. In the same company 
and in exactly the same clay appeared the variety with handle, 7, whose 
affinity with the Minoan types 5 and 6 is at once apparent, and the curious 
horned ‘sheep-bell’ 9. The latter again has a painted prototype parallel 


- 
- 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 181 


with the common painted Minoan cup, see p. 170 and Fig. 1, Nos. 1 and 2. 
The class of cup in question, though it is so like the latter type, could be 
distinguished at once by its thinner section and its lighter, more elegant 
shape. The sorter who assisted me, when tested on the matter, would not 
hear of those cups being put with the heaps of Mycenaean ones, but insisted 
on their being kept in one lot with their Minoan kin just as they were found. 
In this lot, out of a total of 163 fragments it was found that 135 had the 
typical Minoan black glaze slip while 25 were monochrome without slip, 
and 3 were uncharacteristic.” Of those with black slip again 19 had design, 
namely, 7 in lustreless cream and white, 11 in white and red, and 1 in white, 
red and crimson. 

The existence in Minoan deposit of this prototype of a type so char- 
acteristic afterwards of every Mycenaean site is of the utmost importance 
as being one of the links which, with others, go to establish the continuity 
without break of the earlier with the later civilization. In this late Minoan 
deposit the ware with rippled glaze slip was again observable. One frag- 
ment, of a jug, was found in the third metre, and it had below the rippled 
glaze field narrow bands in lustreless white on the lustrous typically 
Minoan purple-black glaze slip, which may here have been a broad band. 
This style of design, like the above type of cup, is one of the undoubted 
links in the evidence of racial continuity between the civilization of the 
Minoan people and that of the later era. Having its origin far back in the 
early Minoan period, in a tradition that is in turn a survival in a new 
medium from the neolithic age, it survives into late Mycenaean times. See 
above p. 160. 

It is in the period represented by this later stratum that the gradual 
decline of the polychrome technique must have taken place. From the 
condition of the deposit itself we are able to say with sufficient certainty 
that polychrome ware was found in greatest quantity and in finest quality 
in the stratum immediately above the Middle Minoan floors. It is equally 
certain in a general way that the later stratum of deposit immediately under- 
lying the palace floors shows a lack of polychrome ware, of the finer qualities. 
The technique with polychrome design on a lustrous black glaze slip itself 
tends, as we have seen, to become monochrome, that is, simple, light design 
on a dark ground. When this stage has been reached the style with light 
design on a dark ground is found, even for the finer kinds of ware, to have no 
practical advantage over the sister style with dark design on a light ground. 
The non-durable character of the lustreless white which it had in common 
with all the other ‘ polychrome’ colours may now indeed appear at a dis- 
advantage in comparison with the durability of the lustrous black of the 
glaze design. The two styles came thus to be on an equal footing of 
competition with the chances of final victory in favour of the monochrome 
style. But this tendency is itself the work of the Minoan civilization 


2 The large proportion with black glaze fact that many of the fragments were of a 
slip in this case is to be accounted for by the type of cup that almost always has a slip. 


182 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


entering upon a new phase of its existence, not some influence imposed upon 
it from without, for as we have seen the evidence afforded by the pottery 
taken in its complete context is that the monochrome tendency was present 
and developed alongside of the polychrome from the beginning, so that by 
the time the polychrome style began more and more to sink into latency 
the monochrome technique, already at the same stage of development as the 
other, was simply left to take more and more possession of the field. 

If we now compare the results obtained at Knossos with the evidence 
forthcoming from other sites it may be possible to come to some general 
conclusions. First of all has to be noted the great depth of the deposit αὖ 
Knossos containing Minoan ware. In the test-pit in the Room of the Olive 
Press fragments of this ware began to occur in the metre immediately 
underneath the floors of the Middle Minoan period in sufficient quantities to 
exclude any suspicion of their presence being accidental. Above this floor 
again the Minoan deposit, as we have seen, is continuous for 3 metres up to the 
paving of the later palace. We have besides to take into account the interval, 
possibly a long one, represented by the period during-which the floored areas 
were inhabited and during which no deposit could be allowed to accumulate 
on these floors themselves, though corresponding deposit has to be postulated 
as accumulating elsewhere. We have thus to allow a very long period for 
the development of Minoan ceramics from their earliest beginnings to their 
era of decline. Further, with the evidence of so much deposit before us, it is 
clear that the pottery in question must have been manufactured at Knossos 
itself. On the other hand the scantiness and isolation of this ware in all 
deposits in which it has been found outside Crete are in such complete 
contrast to the richness of the Knossian deposits that no further proof is 
needed to bring us to the conclusion that Crete itself is the true source of 
the similar ware found elsewhere, as in Melos, Thera, Tiryns, Mycenae, 
Egypt.” : - : 

Most remarkable in this connection are the finds from Egypt. The 
complete isolation in this case made it possible to identify without difficulty 
all that went in the same class with the intruder. Accordingly it is no 
surprise to find the monochrome fragments in ‘ fine, hard, thin, light-brown 
paste of Aegean origin, with iron-glaze bands’ correctly assigned by Petrie 
to the same period and context as the polychrome fragments with lustrous 
black glaze slip. The parallelism of the two styles which we have found 
to hold at Knossos is thus confirmed by means of a few isolated but most 
important fragments found so far afield as Egypt.* The chronological 


*3 BL S.A. iv. 47, v.19. Furtw. τι. Loeschcke, 
Myk. Thongef. vi. (from IV. Shaft-grave). 
Furtw. Antike Gemmen, iii. 20 and notes. 
J.H.S. xi. 275-6, Pl. xiv. 5-10. 

24 Monochrome ware occurs also at Kamares, 
as, for example, Myres, Proceedings of the Society 
of Antiquaries, xv. Pl. I. 6, II. 7. 

Hogarth-Welch, J.H.S. xxi. Pls. VI. VII. 
give only polychrome ware. Furtwingler, Ant. 


Gemmen, iii. 20, note 8, identifies the ware 
from Egypt and that published by Myres and 
Mariani with his own and Loeschcke’s First 
Style and further cites ‘ bei anderen Gattungen ’ 
parallels between Egyptian finds and certain 
ones from Crete and Mycenae, for example, 
Petrie,"Jilahwn-Kahun, Pl. I. 8, with Myres, 
Pl. I. 6, cited above, and with the vase of the 
Second Style Myk. Thongef. Taf. 8, 12; but 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 183 


evidence from Egypt is, however, still more important. Petrie judging from 
the context in which the Kahun fragments were found assigns these to - 
about 2500 B.c. As, however, a glance at the fragments in question and 
comparison with typical Knossos finds will show, the fragments published by 
Petrie, like those from Melos, all belong to the best Minoan period. Thus 
Petrie’s dating must be referred to the period of greatest activity in the 
production of Minoan pottery. If, however, we take into account the earlier 
period anteceding this, we shall have to go back at least to the close 
of the fourth millennium B.c. for the beginnings of the use of glaze and 
other paints in the pottery of Crete. Thus also it.will be safe in a general 
way to say that the development of Minoan ceramic art and the civilization 
represented by it must have taken up the greater part of the period 3000- 
2000 B.c. At Knossos there is evidence enough to show that the great 
Minoan period must have been after the laying of the floors on which were 
found the best polychrome and monochrome wares in the greatest quantities. 
Some of the floors referred to probably belonged, as we gave reasons for 
suggesting, to a palace of the Middle Minoan period, antedating by at least 
some centuries the foundation of the later palace excavated by us. The 
floors, the stratification, the fresco, and especially the pottery, all point to a 
Minoan period of prosperity and wealth, which culminated about the middle 


_ of the third millennium B.c., and during which it is no surprise to find that 


the Minoan people were in busy communication with such centres as Tiryns, 
Mycenae, the Aegean generally, and Egypt. 


IIIl.—The Pottery of the late Minoan Palace Period. 


One outcome of the Minoan civilization was the gradual process by 
which, the polychrome style tending itself to become monochrome, both 
Minoan styles come to be, as we have seen, on an equal footing of competition. 
All the traditions of technique that did not include the polychrome principle 
itself were the heritage of the monochrome equally with the polychrome 
style. First among the old common possessions was the glaze technique 
itself. This, having been from the beginning the one foundation of all design 
for the monochrome style, the potter did not now require to put into 
tentative practice for the first time. He had rather simply to continue the 
use of it under new conditions according to a method which had belonged to 
it in contra-distinction to the method of the other style from the very 
start of their long companionship together. The changed conditions under 
which the twin styles were now practised were thus simply the outcome of 
a long traditional past of practice, not of any external circumstances 


he does not say whether he regards these latter Second Style runs parallel with their First and 

essentially monochrome examples as belonging _ that, thus taken together, they answer respec- 
to the same fabric as the polychrome ware. tively to the Minoan Polychrome and Mono- 
From the examples cited, however, the conclu- chrome Styles. ' 


᾿ sion should be all the same that F. and L.’s. 


184 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


indicating pressure from without upon a decaying race. The Minoan people 
were now, under changing conditions of an essentially intrinsic character, 
only entering upon a new phase of their existence, and the Minoan potters, 
though gradually losing hold of their old polychrome faculty, were only 
devoting themselves with renewed energy, and giving a new turn, to a 
monochrome style in ceramic art that was as old as the other. 

This era of renewed life was that which saw the building of the second 
palace at Knossos. But so much building on so grand a scale was not possible 
without the removai of a good many old land-marks. Preliminary to the laying . 
of the foundations a considerable part of the top of the hill was levelled 
away with a view to gaining as large an area of plane surface as possible 
for the ground floors of the palace. During those operations all the 
Minoan deposit in the area covered by the central regions of the palace, 
along with some considerable part of the latest neolithic remains, disappeared. 
We have found proof of this already in the case of the test-pit in the Third — 
Magazine. On the East Slope again, where one would not have expected 
it, the same preparations led at one part to an even more thoroughgoing 
removal of earlier deposit. Thus, in the whole complex of apartments con- 
nected with the Grand Staircase and the Hall of the Colonnades in the 
East Wing of the palace, the ground-floors were laid at so low a level that 
in the direction of the Central Court the preparatory excavations..by the 
builders led to the removal not only of most Minoan but of almost all neolithic 
deposit as well. Accordingly in the area covered by this East Wing we 
only found evidence of the earlier civilization to the N.E. and S. of this 
deep excavation. And thus it has come about that the data for the period 
immediately preceding the building of the palace are not sufficient for 
an estimate of the process by which the polychrome technique gradually 
gave way before the growing popularity of the companion monochrome 
style. That the laying of the palace floors did not coincide with any abso- 
lutely new departures in ceramics follows from the previous history of 
the monochrome technique itself, and is what we’should at once expect by 
analogy with what we found to have happened in the previous period when 
the Middle Minoan floors were laid. And yet there is a real break in the 
evidence at this point in the later as in the earlier period. On the floors of 
the palace we find not the wares that were in use during the whole of the 
period of habitation of the building, but only those that were in vogue at 
the end of that period. These all belong to a fully-fledged Knossian style 
in which the old Minoan system of design with decoration in lustrous black 
glaze on a buff ground is seen now in a new, advanced phase of develop- 
ment, now, however, without its old companion the technique with poly- 
chrome design on a lustrous black glaze slip. Thus the steps in the 
process by which the monochrome technique secured such pre-eminence as 
to lead first to the decline and then apparently to the disappearance of the 
other cannot as yet be adequately traced with the data before us. That 
could only be done in case we came into possession of the actual deposit- 
evidence from houses and tombs relating to the period not represented by 


Ss ee 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 185 


deposit on the palace floors themselves. Failing that again the missing 
links in the chain of evidence can only be supplied by the results of excava- 
tions over a wider field and a comparative study of early Cretan ceramics 
as a whole. 

1. We were, however, able in a few cases to find ceramic evidence 
relating to the early period of the later palace. In one case indeed the actual 
co-existence of the two styles during the early palace period has in a crucial 
instance been proved down to a certain point of time, namely, that ushered 
in by the events, of whatever kind, which for some reason or other led to the 
filling up and closing of the secret chests of gypsum existing underneath the 
pavements of the great store-rooms. The data in the shape of pottery in the 
two styles and in the traditional Minoan manner of this period were given by 
the contents of one of these chests themselves. Other evidence having a 
bearing in the same general context was forthcoming in regions without pave- 
ment floors away from the central areas of the building. In the more central 
regions, as we have already seen, very few Minoan remains of any kind exist 
beneath the palace floors. Away from the centre, however, where there is a 
slope, as in the case especially of the N. W. palace-region, remains that were 
earlier than those found on the palace floors were in certain spaces found 
more or less undisturbed on a floor which, all the circumstances being taken 
into account, must belong to the early period of the palace, antedating the 
repairs of which we have evidence in one instance in the closing of the stqre- 
room chests. In the Eighteenth Magazine there was no pavement and on 
getting below the level of the clay floor we came upon a plentiful deposit 
of pottery, among which were several vessels, whole or in fragments, them- 
selves resting on an earlier earth-floor. The most characteristic specimens 
from this deposit were the one-handled, spouted jug-vases, Fig. 7, No. 1, 2, 
which are identical in type and decoration.2® The design consists of a band 
and spiral system respectively in lustrous brown-black and red-brown glaze. 
The bands have narrower bands and the spirals central rosette-groups of dots 
in lustreless white, all in a polished buff clay slip on terracotta-red clay. 
This deposit, while already apparently quite ‘Mycenaean’ in character, has 
Minoan types with lustrous black glaze slip whose presence can hardly be 
accidental, for they occur repeatedly all over the area on the earlier floor in 
similar company to that of the above vases. In the special circumstances 
of the case this deposit was limited to areas with earlier floors but without 
pavement, and was not to be expected in paved regions of the palace which 
probably had practically the same floors from the beginning. Thus we have 
not as yet sufficient dita at Knossos itself towards a comparative conclusion 
based on the evidence from different areas. If, however, we go to other 
excavated sites we shall find that the context in which similar vases occur 
is the same as at Knossos. 


35. B.S.A. vii. 47, Fig. 14. ~ metal jugs of the Kefti. See Miiller, Asien 
36 These jugs, with differences traceable to wnd Europa, p. 849, Nos. 8 and 9. 1 has ἢ. 


_ the exigencies of the potter’s art, are the 416. base ἃ. 134c. shoulder d. 29c. 2 has 


counter-part in clay of the spouted one-handled ἢ. 394c. base d. 146. shoulder ἃ. 26c. 


rl 
4 


DUNCAN MACKENZI 


186 


- 
- 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 187 


At Melos vases of identical type and decoration occurred along with 
native imitations in deposit belonging to the mature native Melian period, 
underlying the latest deposit characterized exclusively by imported Mycenaean 
ware.7_ The true Minoan ware on the other hand was at Melos found in 
much earlier deposit. At Mycenae, again, a filler vase in the same 
technique and with similar design was found in the second Shaft-tomb in 
the same company with the vase having design in ‘matt’ colours: Furt- 
wiingler u. Loeschcke Myk. Thongef. iv. 14,13. Exactly similar in technique 
is the 3-handled jar (F. and L. ἐδ. vii. 42) from the Fifth Shaft-grave at 
Mycenae. The context in which this vase occurs enables us to arrive at a 
decisive conclusion. It was found along with a series of vases with lustreless 
colours (ib. 39-40), probably native Mycenaean, and with the fragment 41 
with spiral design in lustreless white on a slightly lustrous black glaze slip. 

There is nothing in this context to justify us in putting the vase 42 
later than the other specimens found in the same grave. Yet if we except 
the fragment with the black glaze slip the vase itself is entirely out of 
keeping with its environment. The explanation probably is that the vase in 
question is an importation, presumably from Crete, at a period when vases 
such as those with the ‘matt’ colours found along with it were still being 
manufactured at Mycenae. In that case it is all the more likely that the 
vessel represented by the fragment with spiral design in lustreless white on 
a black glaze ground was also, if not an importation, at any rate the work 
of potters under Cretan influence. There is no other reasonable explanation 
of the sudden appearance of vases with a finished glaze technique in the 
simple company of the vases with lustreless colours, which on the other 
hand seem to have been the regular fashion at Mycenae at the period to 
which they belong. The handsome filler vase in particular is identical with 
a type which must have had a metal prototype, possibly even at this time 
and certainly at a later period reproduced in stone at Knossos. Furtwingler 
and Loeschcke are probably right in putting xi. 56 from the Sixth Grave 
late in the same series. It and the vase 55 from the same tomb repeat 
two types that are extremely common at Knossos for the period to which 
they belong. On the other hand the vases with ‘matt’ colours from the 
Sixth Grave (7d. viii.—x.) represent the contemporary fabrics native to Mycenae, 
They in turn belong to a wider Graeco-Aegean context and those with 
birds have their nearest affinities with the native bird yases in lustreless 
colours of the mature period in Melos.* 

All this is in complete contrast with the consistent story told by the 
finds from Crete. And the evidence from other sites so far as forthcoming 
is in complete harmony with that from Knossos. At Zakro, for example, 
vases—perhaps the finest of their class—with a similar synthesis of the two 
styles have been found in ἃ similar deposit by Mr. Hogarth. The naturalism 


7 B.S.A. ν. 17-18. Three examples of this % B.S.A. iv. 46. 
class are known from Thera. See F. and L. 2% J.H.S. xxii. Pl. xii. 2and 3 contemporary, 
Myk. Vas. 21, Figs. 7 and 8, and Dumont 21, οἵ course, with vase 1. See Evans, B.S. 4. 
No. 45, Pl. II, 21. viii. 89. 


188 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


of the design so characteristic of these vases recurs also at Knossos in typical 
instances in the same medium of lustreless cream-white on a dark glaze 
ground in a deposit which also belongs to the early period of the palace. The 
vases from this deposit are grouped together on Fig. 8. The most important 
in this connection are the two 2-handled ‘flower-pot’ vases with grace- 
ful lily-design in lustreless cream-white on a thin dull purple-brown almost 
lustreless glaze slip on dull buff clay.*° In this context again light 
design on a dark ground is seen to alternate with dark design on a light | 
ground while the spiral is found to occur in the dark as well as in the 
light medium. A numerous class of vases of more pronounced ‘ Mycenaean’ 
character with naturalistic design in lustrous brown-black glaze on a 
(usually) lustrous buff clay ground is represented by fragments from different 
localities which must belong to the same early palace period. 

Very important evidence regarding the relation of the two traditional 
styles to each other at the end of this early period was furnished by 
the contents of the cist in the Fourth Magazine referred to above. The 
principal contents of this cist in the light of their bearing on the history of 
the palace have been already described by Dr. Evans (B.S.A. vii. 46-48, Fig. 
14). The importance of the evidence in that connection was the proof afforded 
by the Minoan style of the pottery as to the essentially Minoan character 
of the earlier parts of the building as a whole. Bearing in mind that the 
examples selected for that purpose all for the sake of emphasis exhibit the 
technique with light design on a dark ground, it will here suffice if we put 
on record the co-existence, with these examples, of the class with dark design 
on a light ground. 

Besides those examples the cist contained 149 other fragments. Of 
these, 14 sherds, probably belonging to one vessel, an amphora like that cited 
iid. on Fig. 14, had (all but 2) spirals in lustreless cream-white on an almost 
lustreless purple-black glaze slip on sooty grey-black clay. In the class of , 
dark design on a light ground again out of 82 fragments, probably many 
of them belonging to a vessel or vessels of the same amphora-type as the 
other, 78 had broad bands, sometimes apparently spirals, in lustreless 
purplish-red (32) or purple-black (46) glaze on the rough terracotta-coloured 
ground of the clay. 2 fragments had bands in lustrous red-brown, one in 
lustrous brown-black glaze on a fine buff clay slip on terracotta-red clay. 
1 fragment was of a common unpainted ‘Mycenaean’ cup. As, however, 
the existence of this type of cup has been already verified in Minoan deposit 
of an earlier period the above example need not be regarded as an intruder 
here. 53 fragments without design also apparently belonged to this class. 

The fact that, with a few exceptions, most if not all of the fragments in 
either style apparently belonged to vessels of the amphora, jar, or jug class 
is quite in harmony with their store-room environment, and that again with 
the view that they were thrown into the cist with the other débris just as 


0 The three-handled spouted jug from in design and apparently in technique as 


Thera, F. and L. Myk. Vas. 19, Fig. 6, Du- almost certainly to belong to the Cretan school 
mont, Céram. Pl. 11, 14, is so similar to these οἵ this period. A 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 189 


viii.) 


(From B.S. A. 


8. 


Fic. 


190 ; DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


they were found at hand. They must thus be taken as samples of the sort of 
wares in use in this store-room environment at the period which saw the 
closing of the cists. If now with the above fragments we take into account 
those represented by the vessels or parts of vessels 7b. Fig. 14 we find 
that at this period, in the one class of amphorae alone, the style with 
light design on a dark ground alternates regularly with that having dark 
design on a light ground. Thus the synthesis of the two styles represented 
in a certain class of vases of this general period having light design on dark 
design on a light ground is no real solution of the old Minoan dualism, for at 
the very end of this period, as we have seen, we find the two traditional 
Minoan techniques still practised together side by side. 

2. The repairs with which the closing of the cists is to be connected as 
one incident mark the end of an old and the beginning of a new period in 
the history of the palace. To what extent in this second period the two 
techniques continued on the old lines of practice we cannot say, because in 
accordance with a law which we have already found to hold in similar cir- 
cumstances the relative deposit is lacking above the Palace floors. On the 
other hand, while it is not very probable that a parallelism of the two styles, 
which we found to hold in full up to the very end of the previous period, 
should with any suddenness have fallen into disuse with the changes in- 
augurating the new era of prosperity signalized by the renovation of the 
Palace, we have evidence enough that at the end of this period the technique 
with light design on a dark ground is no longer practised to any appreciable 
extent. For in the same context with the wares found on the Palace floors 
belonging in typical examples to a mature palace style native to Knossos, the 
pottery with light design on a dark ground no longer appears, though the 
Minoan traditions in latent survivals still continue to exist among the 
dependent population of the palace.*! | 

From the evidence already before us it is however clear that, between 
the fully fledged Knossian technique represented by the pottery found on the 
Palace floors and that of the previous period, there is no real break corre- 
sponding to the actual break in the continuity of the deposit. That break, 
as we saw in the similar case of the Middle Minoan habitations, has its ex- 
planation in the regular sweeping of the Palace floors. The deposit corre- 
sponding to that which is lacking on those floors exists, of course, elsewhere, 
so that for full proof we have only to await the results of further excavations. 
That there is at any rate a very distinct reminiscence of the old Minoan 
technique with light design on a dark ground down to the period represented 
by the deposit on the palace floors, is shown by some curious transitional 
fragments in a sort of inverse of the contemporary palace style (see Fig. 9). 
On these the glaze, which at this period usually'forms the design-medium, 
once more appears as dark background, but instead of the design being in 
lustreless white on this dark ground, intervals are left in the field in which 

the buff ground of the clay or clay slip is allowed to appear light against the 


31 See 8, S.A. vii. 10-12. Figs. 4, 24, 26-28. 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 191 


dark background of the glaze.*® This peculiar device for producing light 
design on a dark ground affords indication -besides of the consciousness at 
this time of the technical inconveniences of the non-permanent Minoan 
colour-pigments for vessels in constant daily use. On the other hand it is 
quite possible that show-vessels used in connection with the cult of the dead 
might prove, by the discovery of tombs belonging to this period, to show a 
much larger survival of the lustreless light designs on a lustrous dark ground 
than could be conjectured from contemporary practice in the case of vessels 
meant for actual household use.* 

Let us now come to the record afforded by-this palace deposit as a 
whole. That deposit, for the reason already stated, does not represent the 


Fic. 9. 


whole of the general period to which it belongs, but only the end of that 
period. The story told by the deposit found, in similar circumstances, on 
floors of the Middle Minoan period is thus once more repeated in the case of 
that belonging to the great days of the Palace. Thus the pottery found on 
the floors in the more central regions of the Palace all belongs to the mature 
Knossian period. In this deposit ‘Mycenaean’ pottery in a fully developed 
Palace style native to Knossos occurs in one general context with the 
magnificent series of stone vases, with the frescoes of the great period, and 
with the written records of the Palace that now adorn the museum. at 
Candia. Already in the first year of excavation some fine fragments in this 
grand Palace style were found in the Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth Magazines 


82 There is here a curious anticipation of the 33 Again and again in later history we find 
means by which the Greek black-figured tech- the survival and revival of polychrome practice 
nique became transformed into a red-figured in ceramic art connected in a special way with 
style in the latter half of the sixthcenturyB.c. the cult of the dead. 


** 


DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


192 


Fic. 10.—AMPHORA OF THE PALACE STYLE. 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 193 


7 ae 


ΟΝ ΡΤ Ὺ 


Fic. 10A.—AMPHORA OF THE PALACE STYLE. 


H,S.—VOL. XXIII. ο 


~ tess - at ee Us 


194 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


(see B.S_A. vi. 25, vii. 51), and in the second year in the great external angle 
just outside the Eighth Magazine. The ware was seen at once to be native 
to Knossos, and Dr. Evans in his report points out that on those fragments 
‘the rosettes have an obvious relation to those of the fresco borders and 
stone-reliefs, and that they ‘are in fact taken over from the architectura] 
frescoes and reliefs of the Palace.’ Almost all of these fragments were found 
to belong to a large three-handled amphora of a type which must have been 
very much in vogue at the period to which they belong. The ware till quite 
recently was only known through isolated fragments from other sites. Now, 
however, a vase from a Mycenae tomb and fragments of another from the 
dromos of the Vaphio Tomb have been identified by Mr. J. H. Marshall as 
belonging to the same fabric, and as importations probably from Knossos 
(B.S.A. vii. 51). With the help of the Vaphio fragments Mr. Marshall has 
made a reconstruction, reproduced in Fig. 10, of the kind of amphora pre- 
supposed by the Knossos fragments. 

Each succeeding season’s excavations have added to the material for 
coming to a conclusion, and now’ there is so much at our disposal that it 
is possible not only to affirm the dominant influence of the style at 
Knossos during the best period, but also to trace the continuance of that 
influence into the period of decline. The amphora, Fig. 10a, from the ex- 
cavations of 1902, illustrates the later more sketchy phase of the Palace 
Style. H. 77c. base d. 23c. shoulder d. 626. rim ἃ. 31c. 

In all the pottery of this class belonging to the great period, the design 
is usually in a brilliantly lustrous brown-to-black glaze on a buff clay slip 
carefully polished by hand on terracotta clay, usually with black sand 
particles in it. The tint of the glaze varies from red-brown, where the 
glaze is laid on thin and the buff ground affects the tint, to black, where 
the glaze is laid on thick and the buff ground has no such effect. The 
surface effects are in turn locally varied through intentional irregularities 
in the firing that to begin with must have been accidental. Like most 
vessels of large size at Knossos the vases represented by the fragments in the 
grand Palace style are hand-made. For smaller classes of vessels the use of 
the wheel, as already in the Middle Minoan period, is of course universal. 

Parallel with this more decorative ‘ quasi-architectonic ’ style there runs, 
as Dr. Evans has already pointed out (2. 51),a more naturalistic style in 
which plant and animal forms appear repeating types in the scenes themselves, 
as distinguished from the merely architectonic framing and detail, of the wall- 
paintings. As is natural, both tendencies sometimes appear together on the 
one vase. The parallelism between the work of the potter and that of the 
fresco-painter is in this respect so close, that to account for it no further proof 
is required that the pottery in question was produced where the fresco itself 
was produced, that is to say, on the spot. Figs. 11, 12 show a series of frag- 
ments with naturalistic plant and flower designs which look as though they 
were taken over direct from the wall-paintings. Fig. 13 reproduces similar 
motives of distinctly later tendency. They are easily distinguished by a 
decline to a conventional short-hand method of rendering plant and flower 


190 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


detail which becomes gradually more and more typical of the decadent 
].34 


perio 
Equally typical of the Palace style, though apparently more rare than the 


Fic. 12. 


floral motives, are the representations of birds and fishes. See Fig. 14. 
These fishes and birds are brought into their true context for Knossos 


33. The conventional symmetry of arrangement ~ models ; compare, for example, flower detail on 
in the case of Fig. 18, 2, goes back to Egyptian painted pavement, Tell-el-Amarna PI. II. 


198 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


through the recent discovery in the Queen’s Megaron of the remains of 
a grand fresco with fishes, and the still more interesting discovery in the 
same quarter of the palace of part of a fresco with birds of brilliant plumage 
partly in the flat, partly in low relief.*° 


Fie. 14. 


3. That the designs with floral motives and with birds and fishes con- 
tinued in favour beyond the great Palace period at which in pottery as in 
wall-painting the rendering of such subjects is at its best, is shown by the 
conventional short-hand rendering of blossoms already apparent in the case of 


%° The birds and the fish (the latter also in and 1, Myk. Vasen. xvii. 111, Mycenae δ, 
fresco) recur in contemporary Melos(B.S,A. iv. xxxix. 402. The vase ib. xiv. 87 is from Crete. 
Pl. II. p. 46) and Mycenae (F. and L. Myk. probably from Knossos. 

Thongef. ix.). Later examples from Sparta, F. 


Ti 


ἡ δεῖσαι il it is now pers as we have seen, to trace the develop- 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 199 


the να ΣΕΡΙ reproduced Fig. 13, and those with birds Fig. 14, as well as 


the vase with fishes from Knossos (Myk. Vas. xiv. 87). This pottery, often 


_ classed as best Mycenaean, already belongs to the beginning of the decadent 


period. While pottery in the grand Palace style of Knossos is comparatively 
rare outside of Crete, the style of pottery which is most clearly characterized 
by its conventional rendering of foliage and flowers is found in a much wider 
context, embracing the whole of the East Mediterranean basin. 

_ This decadent style at Knossos is typical of a period when the palace is 
only partially inhabited and probably is no longer a royal residence. The 
Biigelkanne which is rare in the great days of the palace is characteristic of . 
this third period. It goes through the more naturalistic phase of decoration 
represented by the Knossian example with fish (Myk. Vas. xiv. 87) to the 
more summary rendering of marine subjects represented 7), 88, also from 
Knossos. At last, in the latest period of partial habitation, all of decoration 
that remains is in the shape of the occasional groups of horizontal bands, 
representing the architectonic frame-work of earlier design, in usually almost 
lustreless brown-black glaze on the pale yellow porous clay or clay slip 
which 15. typical of the latest period. In this latest period thousands of 
kylix-cups, amphorae and jars exist in this pale yellow clay without any 
decoration. 

The perfectly uniform character of style in the Aegean area at this 
period is at once apparent on the comparison of wares from different centres. 
Thus the ware from Melos (B.S.A. iv. 47, v. 18, 19), Mycenae (F. and L 
Myk. Vas. xxx.), from Ialysos (ib. i—x.), from Tell-el-Amarna in Egypt (Petrie, 
Tell-el-Amarna xxvi—xxx.) is perfectly identical with that of the same late 
period from Crete (F. and L. ἐδ. xiii—xiv.). , Further in one case, Melos, it 
is certain that all the ‘Mycenaean’ ware belonging to this period was 
imported into the island. Again we have the remarkable instance of the 
late ‘ Mycenaean’ ware found in Egypt, all of which was imported. If we 
take the proved instances of importation into particular centres in con- 
nection with the perfect uniformity of style prevalent at this period at all 
the centres that come into account, the hypothesis of production at one 
centre becomes strengthened. Furtwingler and Loeschcke with the evidence 


_ before them when they wrote, thought this centre must have been Mycenae. 


With the additional evidence before us now, taken in connection with the 
fact of ascertained importation into Melos and Egypt, it is more probable 
that this centre was Crete, to which Melos on the one hand and Egypt.on the 
other are next-door neighbours on either side. 

The true proof that Crete was the dominant influence in the creation 
of the so-called ‘Mycenaean’ style with monochrome design in lustrous 
black glaze on a light ground is, however, to be found in the fact that of 
all the Aegean centres of ceramic industry Crete alone possesses a glaze 
Perey going back to the earliest use of paint in pottery. From these 


200 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


ment of two tendencies in this medium to their culmination in an elaborate 
polychrome and an equally mature though less elaborate monochrome style, 
at a period when in the rest of the Aegean and its mainland periphery the 
use of lustreless paints without glaze was the order of the day. Thus at 
an epoch when elsewhere in the Aegean potters were still working in lustre- 
less media without glaze, we find in Crete a monochrome style in lustrous 
glaze essentially ‘Mycenaean’ in character already created alongside of 
the contemporary polychrome style. 


We further found this parallelism of the two Cretan styles surviving: 


.into the early period of the Palace at Knossos, and it is only when the 
monochrome style of Knossos has come to its full maturity that we notice 
that its old time-honoured companion is no longer at its side. Thus though 
for reasons already stated we are not able as yet to trace out all the steps 
in the process by which the fully developed Knossian style was formed, we 
can be quite certain that the outcome is a result of a monochrome tendency 
that in Cretan ceramics was present from the very beginning of the use of 
paint, and that accordingly the mature style that emerges simultaneously 
with the lapse into latency of the sister style is the outcome of a genuinely 
native evolution. A further guarantee of native continuity is afforded by 
the parallelism with the evolution that took place in the history of wall- 
painting, for in fresco we have the same double tendency as in ceramics, of 
light design on a dark ground in competition with dark design on a light 
ground, surviving down into the great days of the Palace.’ There is no 
doubt that the ceramic outcome in the great Palace period reflects a relation 
of the vase-painter to the wall-painter similar to that which held in the 
classical period of a much later time. Thus just as we have the highest 
fruition of Greek classical vase-painting going hand in hand with the 
development of an Attic school of fresco-painting, so in the earlier period 
Aegean ceramics received their most classical expression within the school of 
Knossian wall-painters. This classical expression for the Knossian potter 
was a monochrome style that was*always essentially dark design on a light 
ground. The Attic potter goes through this stage also in his black- 
figured style but ultimately arrives at a monochrome style—the inverse of 
the other—in which the old technique with light design on a dark ground, 
that had sunk into neglect in the great Knossian period, is raised to new 
honour in the red-figured style, and is thus found in its own sphere to reflect 
the final triumph of a principle that must have received its most classical 
expression in the art of the Attic painters of the Epic Cycle. * 


37 Thus, for example, in the Journal of the fifth century B.c. That the Knossians also 


RIL.B.A. Vol. x. No. 4, the spiral design, 
Figs. 43 and 44, probably going back to time- 
honoured Minoan traditions of fresco-painting, 
are light on a dark ground. On the other hand 
the tailed spiral design, ib. Figs. 45 and 46, is 
dark on a light ground. 

38 In this connection the influence of relief- 
painting must have been paramount in the 


were not behind in such good example has 
been amply proved for us by the discovery of 
the remains of grand frescoes in low and high 
relief. We have also already seen that the 
Knossian potters themselves, under the influence 
of old traditions in vase-painting as in fresco- 
painting, were very near the solution of the gld 
problem of a style in light design on a dark 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 


201 


The data for coming to fairly probable chronological conclusions are 
more abundant both at Knossos itself and elsewhere for the palace period 


than they were for the preceding age. 


Typical ware belonging to the early 


period of the Palace was found, as we have seen, to be identical with pottery 
characteristic of the Shaft-tombs at Mycenae, and it has been shown by 


Furtwiingler (Antike Gemmen, III. 21) that early ‘ Mycenaean ’ 


swords like 


some found in the older Shaft-tombs (IV and V) were not only imported 
into but apparently imitated in Egypt towards the end of the Hyksos 
period. As throwing further light on these relations between Egypt and 
the Aegean at this period we must mention the fact that at Knossos in an 
early deposit of the later palace has been found the lid of an alabastron with 


the name of the Hyksos king Khyan.* 


To this general period of mutual 


influence between Egypt and the Aegean have to be referred the Shaft- 


tombs of Mycenae and the earlier pottery of the later palace at Knossos. 


This 


would make the older parts of this building go back to the end of the 
third or beginning of the second millennium B.c., while the pottery found 
by us on the corresponding floors would belong to the end of this general 


period or about 1800 B.c. 


Again vases in stone and in earthenware as well as others represented in 
fresco belonging to the mature palace period succeeding the closing of the 
store-room chests are identical with vases apparently of metal carried by the 
Kefti people in Egyptian frescoes of the time of Thothmes III. This is in 
harmony with other evidence that this mature period of the Palace at 
Knossos belongs roughly to the time of the XVIIIth. Dynasty in Egypt. 

Further, the significance of the fact has been quite rightly pointed out— 


again by Furtwangler, ib. 17, and n. 4—that the ‘ Biigelkanne’ 


does not 


appear on the Kefti wall-paintings and it seems to be rare in Egypt 


till Ramesside times. 


Thus the close of the XVIIIth. Dynasty represents for 


Knossos at any rate the beginning of the period of decline, amply evident in 
the kind of decadent pottery that regularly appears in the same context as 
the Biigelkanne not only at Knossos, as we have seen, but also in Egypt itself, 


as at Tell-el-Amarna and elsewhere.*! 


Most of this kind of pottery must 


belong to the period beginning roughly with the second half of the second 


millennium B.c. 


It is significant of the probable tendency of events in this late period 


universal currency over the Aegean. 


that the decline of Cretan pottery should be coincident with its attainment of 
The first great chapter in the history 


of Aegean pottery ends here with the downfall of the Cretan sea-power and 


the decay of Cretan art. 


The second chapter, not concerning us in this place, was ushered in by 


ground in the manner of the red-figured Greck 

style. That this solution was not followed out 

was perhaps owing to the fact that the interest 

of the Cretan potter in human subjects-was not 
= ed eer τά developed as in the case of the Greek 

: tter of a later time. - 

“8.5.4. vii. 66-67, where the date of the 


᾿ 
΄- Fn 
a Ῥω “hs at 

ae | 2: 7 


a > 


lid is referred by Dr. Evans to the latter part 
of the nineteenth, or the beginning of the 
eighteenth century B.c. 

40. See Asien τε. Europa, 348-9. 

41 Petrie, Tell-cl-Amarna, 17, Pls. 
XXX. 


XXVI- 


202 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


events leading to the transference of influence in the East Mediterranean from 
the South to the North, from the sea-centre to the mainland periphery, from 
Crete to Ionia and Greece. From the point of view of ceramics, the one great 
heritage that the Greek world received from the sea-empire of Crete was the 
lustrous glaze medium and the traditions of style and technique, in 
survival or revival connected with its use. | This process of survival, as recent 
researches have taught us, was much more marked in the East, where the new 
forces at work were less appreciable, than in the West, where alien influence 
was at its strongest. 
post-Cretan elements on more western or geometrié¢ that we can best under- 
stand the complex formation of an Attic style. 

At Athens, after a prolonged period of rivalry between East and West, 
the old Cretan medium of lustrous black glaze is found to have become 
Hellenic and Classic in the course of the sixth and fifth centuries B.c. 
And with the old medium it is hardly surprising that old methods of 
technique should also have survived. Thus we probably have long surviving 
tradition rather than accident or re-invention in the fact that in the latter 
half of the sixth century B.C., the style with light design on a dark ground is 
found once more in competition with that having dark design ona light 
ground. 

In this connection it will not be found ἘΠ to understand the whole 
development in its fulness unless we realize that the Attic fresco-painting of 
the sixth and fifth centuries B.c. in its turn goes back to traditions that had 
their beginning in the Minoan Art of Crete. Thus the red-figured style of 
light design on a dark ground with its revival of a principle which in Crete, 
as we have seen, is in origin as old as any use of paint in pottery, could hardly 
have emerged anew from the condition of latency into which it had sunk in 
the ‘Mycenaean’ Age, had the revival not gone hand in hand with the equally 
traditional example of the relief and fresco-painter. This technique was 
the basis on which an elaborate polychrome style in pottery had been 
developed in Minoan Crete alongside of the polychrome art of the fresco- 
painters. And had the colour-pigments been as durable in practical use for 
the potter as they were on the painted walls of Cretan palaces, the poly- 
chrome style in vase-painting would probably have survived in practical use 
also along with the black glaze ground which was always its essential foun- 
dation. In that case the Greek vases of the fifth century B.c. would have 
been as rich in polychrome harmony of colour as the frescoes of Polygnotos 
or the terracottas of Tanagra. = . 


It is through the gradual grafting of more eastern Οὐ 


#2 See Boehlau, Aus Jondesbbe und Italischen 
Nekropolen, pp. 52-124. Furtwiingler, Antike 
Gemmen, iii. 14, who, however, goes quite 
against the evidence from Crete ir. assigning the 
first extended use of lustrous varnish not to 
Crete but to the Greek mainland. 

8 It is not surprising to find that there is 
apparently continuous local survival in the case 
of fabrics meant for cult or tomb-use. Thus 


the polychrome ware of Naukratis, see B.S. A. 
v. 57-8. The geometric Aeolian ware found in 
Etrurian tombs, Boehlau 7). 91-2, Figs. 45-47. 
For actual survival of Minoan design-motives 
in post-Mycenaean times, see above, p. 179 and 
Boehlau 7b. 65. Later examples are the white- 
figured lekythoi of Athens, and the polychrome 
am phorae of Italy. . 


τ 


--.. 
; 
-. 


THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 203 


Palace Pottery with representations of Shrine, Dowble-axe, and ‘ Horns of 
Consecration.’ 


One curious group of fragments belonging to the Palace period and style 
requires separate classification on account of the constant recurrence of a 
device which is all the more remarkable, because the device itself is of no 
purely decorative value from the point of view of the vase-painter. The 
device meant is the symbol of the Double-axe. Fragments with this symbol 
are grouped together from tracings on Fig. 15. It must be at once apparent 
that the vase-painter in the case of those fragments could not have chosen for 
representation the Double-axe device because of the value for decorative 
purposes of the shapes and designs of bronze originals. If that were so 
we might equally expect the reproduction of other weapons such as inlaid 
shields or sword-sheaths like those from Mycenae. Far from this being the 
case the only weapon that ever appears in Knossian pottery is the Double- 
axe. Even in cases where the use of the Double-axe device on pottery may 
have become merely decorative, we have first to ask the question as to the 
cause of its representation at all, to the exclusion of all other weapons of the 
same class which might be cited as possible. Again in the unique case in 
question if the vase painter had merely had the design in view he would 
naturally have taken it over, in a combination suiting the surfaces at his 
disposal, without any necessity to take over as well the shape, for his purposes 
indifferent, of the object from which the design was copied. Where 
only the design is of interest the actual shape of the object on which the 
design to be copied occurs, if taken over as well, would become a positive 
hindrance to the proper utilization of the decorative motive from the point of 
view of the special kinds of surfaces the pottery has to deal with. The 
conclusion is that the object has evidently an interest of its own quite apart 
from any decorative value belonging to it either in itself or in relation to any 
design upon it regarded merely as design. And this interest is in an object 
which appears out of all connection with other objects except such as are regu- 


_larly associated with it. In other cases those objects are either the ‘ Horns of 


Consecration’ or the Shrine or both together. Now in the case of one of our 
fragments, No. 1, we have the Double-axe shown as set up between the ‘ Horns 
of Consecration,’ in the case of another, No. 2, we have the same symbol set 
up in front of a building which in analogy with other instances can only be a 
shrine.” From the decorative point of view what was said of the Double-axe 
has to be said with equal emphasis of the ‘ Horns of Consecration’ and with 
greater emphasis of the representation of any sort of building. The repre- 
sentation of buildings is so alien to the potter's art of this period that here 


~ 


44 For a fragment from Knossos with similar see J.H.S. xxi, 136, Fig. 18. See also 7. 191, 


_ design restored, see B.S. A. vii, 52-3, Fig.15,a. Fig. 65. 


* Horns of Consecration on Sanctuary Wall, 


904 DUNCAN MACKENZIE 


again there can only be extraneous reasons for the representation. I think 
with Mr. Evans that these can only be sought in the realm of religious 


symbolism. That the Double-axe is meant as a religious symbol is a 


fact put beyond all doubt by the appearance of :the building in the case 


of one of the fragments. A shrine dedicated to the god of the Double- 
axe would have been distinguished from buildings dedicated to other 
divinities by the Double-axe set up in front of it, and again within 
upon the altar by that visible to the worshippers between the ‘ Horns 


ῷ ate _ THE POTTERY OF KNOSSOS. 205 
ration’, The symbol pepreeeniailte of the power, and so of 
t ne divini ivit divinity of the god, must to an Eteocretan have been as natural both 
without and within the shrine as to Christendom is the Cross—symbol 
of another vietory—surmounting a Christian church and visible again 
ἊΝ wishin upon the altar, 


a as 


DUNCAN MACKENZIE. 


46 Proof from real usage has been forthcom- symbolicil Double-ax+ was also found near the 
ing this year with the discovery ofashrine with — table of offerings, while between each pair of 
altar in the Palace at Knossos. The‘ Hornsof horns was the hole in which the shaft of a 
Consecration ’ were in their place upon the altar’ similar double-axe was fixed. See B.S. A. viii. 
tegettior with the sacred i images. Asmallsteatite 100. 


NOTICES OF BOOKS. 


Timotheos, Die Perser, aus einem Papyrus von Abusir im Auftrage der deutsehen 
Orientgesellschaft herausgegeben von ULRICH VON WILAMOWITZ-MOLLENDORFF. Pp. 
126. Mit einer Lichtdrucktafel. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1903. 3m. 


ΤῊΝ appearance of an editio princeps of a newly discovered Greek poet is an event 
the importance of which needs no emphasising. The papyrus here edited by Prof. von 
Wilamowitz-Mollendorff, found during the excavation of an old Egyptian site near 
Memphis, gives us at once the earliest extant Greek manuscript and a first substantial 
knowledge of the poet Timotheus of Miletus. The objects found with the papyrus 
indicate a date not much after the middle of the 4th century B.c., and the archaic 
character of the script is quite in accordance with this evidence. The poem originally 
occupied six broad columns (29 to 26 lines in each, written continuously, without verse- 
division), of which one is almost wholly lost, the second is badly mutilated, and the last 
four are intact. The editor’s arrangement of it in short verses gives a length of 253 lines 
to the part preserved. As to its identity there is no doubt, for in the concluding section 
the author names himself, and refers to his predecessors in his art and the criticisms 
passed upon his innovations—criticisims with which we were already acquainted from the 
comic poet Pherecrates ; and the subject is a naval defeat of the Persians by the Greeks, 
evidently that of Salamis, though no name, of place or person, occurs in it. Hence it is 
evidently the νόμος of the Persae, which we know from Plutarch to have been popular at 
the time of Agesilaus’ campaigns in Asia Minor, to which date its composition probably 
belongs. It is therefore a specimen of a class of poem hitherto unknown to us, the νόμος. 
It also represents a new literary school. Its characteristics are an excessive use of 
metaphor, of which the phrase "Apews φιάλη, meaning a shield, quoted by Aristotle (Poet. 
1457 b 22) is quite a moderate example. The poem has neither historical nor ethical 
interest ; it is purely an exercise in poetic diction, of great interest to us as an example 
of a new stage of Greek artistic development, but not intrinsically of high literary merit. 
So tortured is the language that Prof. von Wilamowitz-Mollendorff finds it impossible to 
translate it into any modern language, but gives instead a Greek paraphrase, after the manner 
of the scholiasts. He also gives a full discussion of the metre, character, and contents of 
the poem, and, in short, provides everything that an editio princeps should have to enable 
the reader properly to appreciate the new discovery. A separate facsimile edition of the 
papyrus is also published (at 12 marks), containing seven photographic plates, the editor’s 
restored text, and a short introduction. 


The Tebtunis Papyri, Part I.; edited by B. P. Grenrett, A. S. Hunt, and J. G. 
Smyty. Pp. xix+674; with 9 plates. London and New York: Frowde, 1902. £2 5s. 
net. 


This large volume, published alike for the University of California (which financed the 
expedition and owns the papyri), and the Graeco-Roman branch of the Egypt Exploration 
Fund, which lent the services (previously pledged to them) of Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt, 


NOTICES OF BOOKS 207 


gives a first instalment of the papyri found at Tebtunis in the winter of 1899-1900, This 
section deals with the papyri from the cemetery of mummied crocodiles, some of which 
animals were found to be wrapped in, or stuffed with, rolls of papyri, many of them of great 
length. The date of all the texts here printed lies between 150 and about 608.c. Only four 
are literary ; two containing short lyrical excerpts from unknown authors, while one is a 
fragment of a collection of epigrams, and another contains portions of Homer II. IL., 
95-210, with several critical signs. The bulk of the volume, however, is composed of 
official documents, notably those of the κωμογραμματεύς of the village of Kerkeosiris, 
giving elaborate details with regard to the distribution of crops in the village land, and 
the revenues derived therefrom. The data are summarised in a valuable appendix, which 
gives aclear statement of the various classes of land tenure in the Fayum (γῇ βασιλική, 
ἱερά, κληρουχική, and certain smaller categories), and the revenues drawn from them for the 
state, and throws considerable light on the manner in which military settlers (κάτοικοι and 
others) were planted on the land by the government. A second appendix deals with the 
vexed question of the ratio between silver and copper under the Ptolemies, subverting the 
old belief in a ratio of 120: 1, by producing clear instances of conversion of silver into 
copper drachmae at rates from 500:1 to 375:1. It is consequently maintained that the 
notion of an equality of weight between silver and copper drachmae must be given up, and 
a theory of Regling’s is adopted which gives a weight of from 15 to 20 grammes to a coin 
of 80 copper drachmae, and consequently a ratio of value between silver and copper of, 
approximately, 30:1. These two appendices contain the gist of the whole volume, but 


there is a multitude of detail in it which will be essential to the student of Ptolemaic 
economics. 


The Republic. of Plato, edited with critical notes, commentary, and appendices, by 
JamMEs ADAM. Vol. I., Books I.—V., pp. xvi+364, 15s.; Vol. II. Books VI.—X. and 
Indexes, pp. vit+532. Cambridge University Press: 1902. 18s. 


This is a full critical and explanatory edition of the Republic, similar in scale to that of 
Jowett and Campbell. The text is based primarily, as is natural, on Parisinus A (which 
Mr, Adam has re-collated for himself), the next MS. in authority being Venetus 1, then 
Venetus Z and Monacensis q, then Angelicus v. The commentary aims at being objective and 
impersonal, based on a close study of Plato’s own writings and those of his contemporaries, 
and striving to exclude interpretations in the light of subsequent philosophy. The indices 
include a classified list of errors in the MSS,, which will be useful to palaeographers, and a 
table of the conjectural readings adopted in the text (94 in all, of which 30 are due to 
Mr. Adam himself). Among the appendices is a full examination of “ Plato’s Number,” 
of which subject Mr. Adam has made a special study. A volume of prolegomena is 
promised to complete the edition. 


ἈΡΙΣΤΟΦΑΝΟΥΣ KOMOIAIAL. Facsimile of the Codex Venetus Marcianus 474 ; with a 
preface by J. WiLttaMs Wuir®, and an introduction by T. W. ALLEN. Pp. 234344. 
London and Boston: [printed for the Archaeological Institute of America, aud the 


Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies], 1902. In portfolio, £6; half 
morocco, £6 6s. 


This volume contains a complete collotype facsimile of the Codex Venetus of Aristophanes, 
comprising the seven dramas—-Plutus, Clouds, Frogs, Knights, Birds, Peace, Wasps—with 
a short preface by Prof. White, of Harvard, explaining the purpose of the publication, 
aud a full pa'aeographical introduction by Mr. Allen. The Codex Venetus was preferred 
to the Ravennas on the ground that it is less well known, and while in text the Venetus is 


not inferior to its rival, its scholia are unquestionably superior, and are of essential 


208 NOTICES OF BOOKS 


importance for the criticism of Aristophanes. Mr. Allen assigns the MS. to the 11th 
century, and gives full details as to the work of the several scribes and correctors, and the 
arrangement of the scholia. The photographs, which have been minutely compared with 
the original by Prof. Lionello Levi, are clear and good. 


The Argive Heraeum. By Caartes Watpsrern. Vol. I. General Introduction, 
Geology, Architecture, Marble Statuary, and Inscriptions. [Archaeological Institute 
of America: American School of Classical Studies at Athens.] Pp. xix+231. 41 
plates and many illustrations. Boston and New York: Houghton, Mifflin, & Co., 
1902. £3 7s. 6d. : 


This work, which is to be completed in two volumes, is the definitive publication of the 
results of the excavations of the American School at Athens, on the site of the Argive 
Heraeum (1892—4). Ten gentlemen are named on the title-page as cobperating with Dr. 
Waldstein, but those who take part in the present volume are four. Mr. H. 5, Washing- 
ton describes the geology of the neighbourhood, especially as bearing on the excavations. 
Mr. E. L. Tilton supplies an elaborate account of the architectural remains, of which the 
most important are the successive.temples, Of the first, the traces are scanty, and the 
restoration is conjectural. The data for reconstructing the second temple are fairly com- 
plete. The inscriptions on stone and clay are published and discussed by Messrs. R. B. 
Richardson and J. R. Wheeler. The remainder of the volume is contributed by the 
principal author, Dr. Waldstein. A general Introduction discusses the cult of the Argive 
Hera ; the topography of the site ; the ancient authorities relating to the temple and its 
statue ; the history of the Heraeum in legendary and historical times ; the evidence of the 
finds as bearing on the general questions of history ; the history of previous excavations, by 
General Gordon of Cairness in 1831—6, and by Rangabé in 1853; the history of the 
excavations by the American School in three successive years (1892— 4). In a chapter on 
the marble statuary from the Heraeum, the sculptural remains are fully discussed. Of these 
the most important and numerous are the architectural sculptures from the Second 
Temple. Dr. Waldstein argues that they are homogeneous in style, and that they were 
produced about 420 B,c. under the immediate superintendence of Polycleitus. 


Ancient Athens. By Ernest ARTHUR GARDNER. Pp. 579; with maps, plans, 
and illustrations. London: Macmillan & Co., 1902. 21s. net. 


The above work is a descriptive account of Ancient Athens, with special reference to the 
remains extant in situ. The treatment is in the main topographical, but the topography is 
considered in relation to the successive historical periods. Thus, after a general account 
of the site, the natural features, the rivers and water supply, and the principal building 
materials employed, the author discusses the walls and gates ; the Acropolis before the 
Persian wars ; the town at the same early period ; the Acropolis in the fifth century, more 
particularly the Parthenon and other Acropolis buildings ; the public buildings in the neigh- 
bourhood of the Acropolis of the tifth and fourth centuries ; the monuments of the Ceramicus, 
and the remains of Hellenistic and Roman Athens. Chapters follow on the route of 
Pausanias in Athens, and on the topography of the Piraeus. 

By aslight but not illegitimate extension of the scope of the book, early Attic art in 
general and the art of the sepulchral reliefs are somewhat fully discussed as well as 
the works more strictly associated with the architecture and topography of the town. 

The book is illustrated with numerous views, in many cases taken from unfamiliar 
standpoints (but sometimes too small to show the details satisfactorily), with architectural 
drawings for the most part the work of the late Prof. Middleton (and published in the 
3rd Supplementary Paper of the Hellenic Society), and with an excellent map, pans a 
transparent sheet mapichepores to show the ancient remains in isolation. 


NOTICES OF BOOKS 209 


Griechische Vasenmalerei: Auswahl] hervorragender Vasenbilder. By A. Furr- 
WAENGLER and K. ReicHnoip. Parts i-iv. With 40 plates. Munich: F, Bruck- 


mann, 1900-1902. Each 40 m. 


Aided by a fund at the disposal of the Bavarian Akademie der Wissenschaften, Prof. Furt- 
wiingler is emulating the example of the early nineteenth-century savants, such as Millin 
and Millingen, who gave to the world sumptuous volumes in which vase-paintings were 
reproduced with the best results then possible. It is needless to say that the work under 
consideration is far in advance of its predecessors as regards scientific accuracy, no expense 
having been spared to make the illustrations the standard reproductions of the subjects. 
Herr Reichhold, to whom this part of the work is due, is not only a most accomplished 
draughtsman, but thoroughly conversant with the technical aspects of vase-painting, as 
may be seen from the valuable notes he has appended to the descriptions of the plates. 

The work will be completed (for the present) in six parts, but it has been thought 
well to give a preliminary notice of those issued up to date, which comprise forty plates, 
illustrating 29 vases. Of these no less than six are devoted to a complete reproduction of 
the Francois-vase, including separate enlargements of details—a much-needed work, and 
one that has become especially valuable in view of the recent catastrophe which befell the 
vase. Two other early black-figured vases are given, all the rest being red-figured. 
Among the latter are three cups of Euphronios, those in the British Museum, the Louvre, 
and Munich, ; the ‘Iliupersis’ cup of Brygos and the ‘ Vivenzio’ hydria in Naples with 
the same subject ; the magnificent Talos vase in the Jatta collection, and the equally 
magnificent Amazonomachia krater at Naples ; the Meidias hydria in the British Museum ; 
and a fine ‘bilingual’ amphora in Munich, probably by Andokides. The rest are chiefly 
large red-figured vases of the ‘ fine’ style of 450-420 B.c., but all may be described as chefs- 
@ewore. All the drawings are reproduced in phototype except two which are in colour. 
Six vases are entirely new publications, and several others, such as the Meidias vase, have 
never before been satisfactorily reproduced. 


Catalogue des Vases Peints du Musée National d’Athenes. By M. Cotiicnon 
and L, Couve. [Bibliothéque des Ecoles Frangaises, Fasc. 85]. Pp. xii+672. Paris: 
Thorin et Fils, 1902. 28 f. 


This latest addition to the growing series of up-to-date Vase Catalogues describes the 
collections in the National Museum at Athens, with the exception of the Acropolis frag- 
ments, on which Drs. Wolters and Graef are at work, and some of the later Greek 
vases with reliefs or moulded in the form of figures. No less than 1988 vases are described 
in detail, classified according to date and fabric, with full information as to provenance, 
technique, and bibliographical references. The earlier black-figured fabrics of Corinth 
and Ionia are not classified with the scientific discrimination that we are entitled to de- 
mand at the present day, and the arrangement of some of the primitive wares is apt to be 
misleading ; but the actual descriptions of the vases are quite adequate. A supplement 
with indexes has since been issued, and it is understood that the absence of illustrations to 
the Catalogue is to be atoned for by the subsequent publication of an Atlas like those of 
the Louvre Collection. This certainly seems a necessity for a collection containing so 
many unique vases, and fabrics that are entirely unrepresented in the European collections. 
One of the principal features of the Athens collection is the magnificent series of white 
lekythi, those with funeral subjects alone numbering no less than 184. Many of those 
found in Eretria have subjects of special interest. The ordinary B.F. and R.F. fabrics are 
adequately represented, and in such variety as to dispose for ever of the old notions of an 
Italian origin for these vases. Artists’ signatures are rare, but the names of Euergides, 
Pamphaios, and Phintias occur, among others. 
H.S.—VOL. XXXIII. P 


210. NOTICES OF BOOKS 


Catalogue des Vases Peints de la Bibliothéque Nationale. By A. pz Ripper. 
2 vols. Pp. 710. Thirty-four plates and 150 text illustrations. Paris: Leroux 
1901-1903. 60 f. 


This work, now just completed, gives a full description of the collection of nearly 1300 
vases in the National Library at Paris. The finest specimens, such as the Arkesilas cup, 
have already been adequately illustrated in the Atlas of MM. Milliet.and Giraudon, but the 
adinirable photographic plates and text-drawings of these two volumes serve to complete 
the publication of all the more interesting vases in the collection. The first volume, 
dealing with the early and B.F. vases, describes 356, including the fine Chalcidian and 
Cyrenaic specimens, and the vase of Amasis with Athena and Poseidon; the rest are 
mainly Attic R.F., of average merit, with very tew clefs d’wuvre. They include plates by 
Epiktetos, the Dolon cup of Euphronios, and the fine cup signed by Kleophrades and 
Amasis [I. There is a preface with historical account of the collection, and full indices 
are also given. 


Klassisch-Antike goldschmiedearbeiten im Besitze Sr. Excellenz A. J. 
von Nelidow. Beschr. und erl. von Lupwie ΡΟ ΑΚ. Pp. 198. 20 Tafeln in 
Farbendruck, 37  text-illustrationen τ. vignetten. Leipzig: Hiersemann, 1903. 
80 m. ; 


Dr. Pollak, the compiler of this important catalogue of gold ornaments, has chosen for it a 
title sufficiently comprehensive to include not only the direct products of Greek art, as 
exercised in Greece, but everything made under its inspiration in the Greek colonies of Asia 
Minor, Syria, Egypt, Macedonia, the shores of the Euxine and Aegean seas and the Aegean 
islands. His justification is to be found, both in the nature of the famous Nelidow 
collection and the circumstances under which it has been formed. 

M. de Nelidow acquired his treasures entirely by purchase (about one-fourth from the 
Whittall collection, Constantinople,) and almost entirely in Greece and the Ottoman 
Empire, so that though the bulk of it is pure Greek work, there are some objects, such as a 
Lydian pectoral (Plate XVI.), a Hittite statuette (No. 511), and a Perso-Greek necklace 
(Pl. XIII.), which show strong local influence, while others, such as the Syrian earrings 
(Nos, 298, 299), show an Oriental idea run into a Greek mould. The provenance attached 
to the objects shows where they were bought, not their reputed place of origin, but by 
careful comparison with others of authenticated pedigree, Herr Pollak has been able to 
arrive at a reasonable certainty in the matter. The collection contains 561 objects and the 
basis of classification adopted is a chronological and historical one—the earrings, 269 in 
number, are further subdivided into two main groups, according as the idea underlying 
the design is a representation of an actual thing, i.e. a head—human, allegorical, animal, ete.; 
or a purely ornamenta! form. In this connexion Herr Pollak observes that in the earliest 
Greek jewellery the material is entirely subordinate to the design, and colour (stones or 
- enamel) is only used to enhance its beauty, whereas in late Hellenistic work the design is 
merely a means to show off the stones—a phase which, in sculpture, finds its parallel in the 
Palmyrene reliefs. 

The difficulty of a chronological classification lies in the fact that while we know most 
about the ornament of the fourth and fifth century B.c., the majority of extant gold 
ornaments date from Hellenistic times, which Herr Pollak subdivides as follows: Early 
Hellenistic circ. 150 13.0. ; Hellenistic, circ. 100 B.c. ; and Late Hellenistic, up to the end 
of classical times ; the word ‘ Roman’ he carefully avoids, because the gold ornaments of 
the period found in Italy (cf. the earrings 298, 299) are probably importations from 
Syria. ᾿ 

The whole collection is so important that it is difficult to single out any special object, 


but the Lydian pectoral (Plate XVI.),.a beautiful fourth century funereal gold wreath - 


from Mytilene (Plate I.), and a sixth century death-mask from Sidon (Plate VIL.) found 


with diadem No. 11, are exceptionally important. The earrings are all picked specimens, — 


NOTICES OF BOOKS 211 


and it is to be regretted that the plates (from photographs) do so little justice to their 
delicate workmanship—ef. the lynx-head earrings 157 sqq. An unpublished bronze 
(Alexander with a lance) is given as a tail-piece on pp. 139, 184. 


Kleinasiatische Miinzen. Band II. Von F. Imnoor-Biumen. [Sonderschriften des 
dsterr, archiiol. Institutes in Wien, Band III.]. Pp. 275, with 11 photographic 
plates. Vienna: Holder, 1902. 36 m. 


This book is of capital importance not only for numismatists but also for all students of 
the history and geography of Asia Minor. The ground covered by the second volume 
extends from Lycia to Cappadocia ; the districts which are treated at greatest length are 
Pamphylia, Pisidia, and Cilicia. Besides publishing many new varieties of coins, the 
author supplies numerous corrections of previous descriptions, readings, and attributions. 
The sections dealing with Aspendus, Selge, and Side are specially interesting, while not a 
little fresh light is thrown on the satrapal coinage. In connexion with the latter point it 
may be noted that Imhoof pronounces against the possibility of identifying the portraits 
of individual satraps from the money they issued, holding that the heads which appear 
upon their coins merely represent an ideal type, varied according to the caprice of the die- 
cutter. Not much addition is made to our knowledge of the Seleucid period, beyond the 
probable suggestion that Seleucia ad Calycadnum was a mint of Antiochus VIII. and of 
Seleucus VI. The list of value-marks occurring on Greek imperial pieces is considerably 
extended. Malos (Pisidia) and Airai (Ionia) take their places for the first time among 
the cities that are known to have struck money. On the other hand, Amelas (Lycia) 
disappears from the list. Hitherto no coins have been assigned to the Cilician Aphro- 
(lisias, but a strong case is here made out for attributing to that important town two 
distinct groups of uninscribed silver pieces (the series with the baetyl. formerly given to 
Mallos, and that with Athena Parthenos and Aphrodite seated between sphinxes formerly 
given to Nagidos), as well as a unique colonial coin. The discussion of the puzzling coin- 
types of Etenna is a characteristic example of the masterly way in which difficult 
problems are handled. Out of the total number of 275 pages, 31 are devoted to additions 
to Volume I., and 48 to a singularly complete set of indexes which cover both volumes, 
The photographic plates reach the highest level of excellence. 


L’Histoire par les monnaies. Essais de numismatique ancienne. Par ΤΉΚΟΡΟΒΕ 
RemnacH. Pp. iv+272; with 6 photographic plates, and 20 cuts in the text. Paris: 
Ernest Leroux, 1902. 10 f. 


M. Reinach has revised and reprinted in this convenient form the more important of the 
articles contributed by him to various periodicals during the past fifteen years. The range 
of subjects covered is a wide one, and many points of historical interest are touched upon. 
Special mention may be made of the essays that deal with the relative value of the precious 
metals in antiquity, with the genealogy of the Kings of Pontus, with the recently 
discovered addition to the royal line of Bithynia, and with the dynasties of Commagene. 
Elsewhere the artists ‘ Acragas’ and ‘ Daidalos of Bithynia’ are satisfactorily disposed of 
as mere myths, Pliny being made responsible for the former, and Pliny’s editors for the 
latter. The papers included in the volume number 25 in all. There is no index. 


A Catalogue of the Greek Coins in the British Museum: The Coins of 
Parthia. By Warwick Wrors. Pp. Ixxxviii+289 ; with map and 37 photographic 
plates. London: Printed by Order of the Trustees, 1903. 25s. 


This volume (the twenty-third of the series) is devoted to one of the most obscure and 
difficult sections of Greek numismatics, Twenty-five years have passed since Gardner 


Φ Ρ2 


Δ» 


219 NOTICES OF BOOKS 


published his Parthian Coinage. In the interval, so many new coins have been recorded 
that Mr. Wroth has found it necessary to attack the question of classification de novo. His 
introduction gives a clear summary of the little that is certainly known of the story of 
the Arsacidae, and a full discussion of the reasons that have guided him in distributing 
the coins among the various monarchs. While the arrangement makes no claim to absolute 
finality, it undoubtedly marks a very great advance. It is mainly in regard to the earlier 
reigns that the new classification differs from the old. The discovery of a dated tetradrachm 
has shown that a drachm formerly assigned to Phriapatius really belongs to Artabanus I. 
This entails numerous changes, including the transference to Mithradates IT. of the coins 
hitherto attributed to Mithradates I. Attention may be called to the interesting tables 


proving the existence of contemporaneous rulers, each laying claim to the kingship.- 


Separate sections of the Introduction deal with the denominations and weight, the dates, 
the types, and the epigraphy of the Parthian coinage. The monograms and symbols are 
also analysed with the view of seeing how far they furnish a clue to the mints ; the results 
are here chiefly negative. The photographic plates are good. The Indexes and Tables are 
on an even more complete scale than usual. 


Coins of Ancient Sicily. By G. F. Hinn. Pp. ix+256; with 16 photographic 
plates, eighty illustrations in the text, and a Map. London : Constable and Co., 1903. 
21s. net. 


This book is intended for the general student rather than for the specialist in numismaties. 
It aims at giving a complete sketch of the coinage of Sicily from the earliest period down 
to Roman times. The coins for illustration have been most carefully chosen. A short 
Appendix deals with the issues of Malta and Pantellaria. There are two indexes and a 
very useful ‘select bibliography.’ The plates are very good. 


Prosopographia Attica. Edidit Ion. Krrcaner. Vol. IT. Pp. vii+660. Berlin: 
Reimer, 1903, 28 τη. 


This second volume (completing the work) contains the names from A to Q, a conspectus 
of names arranged under demes, tables of the archons from 683/2 B.c., and an index of the 
inscriptions in which gaps have been filled in this work. The whole work is a complete 
and invaluable lexicon of the names of Athenians (including aliens who received the 
citizenship) down to the time of Augustus. It contains also some useful stemmata of the 
more important families. The use of it is somewhat hindered by the nature of the 
fount which has been employed for the headings of the articles. 


'Paulys Real-Encyclopaddie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. New 
Ed. by G. Wissowa. Supplement. Part 1. Pp. vit+columns 374. 1 Plan. Stuttgart: 
Metzler, 1903. 5m, 


The first part of this supplement contains additions and corrections to the first four 
volumes already published, including articles ‘Athenai’ (61 columns) by Wachsmuth, 
‘ Civitas’ (17 columns) by Kornemann, and ‘ Demokratia’ (28 columns) by v. Schoeffer. 


A Popular Handbook to the Greek and Roman Antiquities in the British 
Museum. By E. T. Coox. Pp. xxii+794. 2 plans. London: Macmillan, 1903. 10s. 


This guide to the galleries of the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities (with 
which are included the Gold Ornament Room, the Romano-British Room, and the 


NOTICES OF BOOKS” 213 


Exhibiitons of the Coins of the Ancients) is a compilation for which not only the official 
publications, but a very large number of other books and periodicals, have been laid under 
contribution, 


The House of Seleucus. By E. R. Bevan. 2 vols. Pp. vii+330, 333. 6 plates and 
3 maps. London: Arnold, 1902. 30s. 


This is a monograph not merely on the regal history of the Seleucidae, but on Hellenism in 
the provinces which were contained in their Empire. Apart from its readable style, it is 
indispensable as a collection of material, especially for the period from the beginning of 
the second century which is not covered by Droysen and Niese, The epigraphic evidence 
has been most carefully utilized, and the same is true of the numismatic authorities, espe- 
cially as concerns the most important series, viz., the coins of the kings. A great deal of 
valuable material relating to the eastern provinces of the Empire is also to be found in the 
book, which takes rank among the first authorities on the history of the period, as indeed 
it is practically the only complete monograph on Seleucid history, The plates illustrate a 
series of the regal coins and a marble head in the Louvre (Arndt. 103, 104), which is with 
some probability regarded as a portrait of Antiochus III. There is a very full index. 


Etudes sur I’Histoire de Milet et du Didymeion. By B. Havssov.uier. 
[Bibliothé¢que de Ecole des Hautes Etudes.] Pp. x+323. Bouillon: Paris, 1902. 


Ε΄. M. Haussoullier’s work contains twelve chapters (of which six have already appeared in the 
Revue de Philologie, while the rest are entirely new) ; they are preceded by a collection of 
the ancient texts relating to Didyma and the Didymeion. The subject is treated in three 
parts corresponding to the Macedonian, the Seleucid, and the Roman periods, bringing the 
history down to the end of the first century after Christ, The first temple, burnt by 
Darius, is not dealt with. The special feature of the book is the elaborate treatment which 
is accorded to the epigraphic material, much of it previously unpublished, and nearly all 
of great historical importance, especially for the Seleucid period. The book is well 
indexed. 


Hileithyia. By Paut Baur. [University of Missouri Studies, Vol. I., No. 4.] Pp. vi+90. 
Univ. of Missouri, 1902. $1.00. 


This tract sets out with an attempt to prove that the primitive idols of the ‘ Island’ and 
‘Brettidole’ types, and a series of ‘Mycenaean’ and ‘ post-Mycenaean’ statuettes, represent 
an early ‘goddess of generation and childbirth.’ But the author fails to recognise two 
facts which tell against his argument: (1) the accentuation of sexual organs, which, 
he thinks, typified her character, was for primitive art the only available way of indicating 
sex, and (2) specialisation of the functions of deities is utterly foreign to the period in 
question, Two chapters on Sanctuaries of Eileithyia and her Representation in Art are 
followed by one dealing fully with ‘ Votive Offerings to Deities of Childbirth.’ The point 
Mr. Baur raises in connexion with masks of Eileithyia lately found in her Grotto at 
Paros, which he suggests had some cult-use similar to the ceremonial wearing of the 
Demeter-mask at Pheneos (Paus. viii. 15), seems well worth developing further. As a 
contribution to mythology, the treatise suffers from the prevailing tendency to use ancient 
authorities merely as a ‘literary supplement’ to the monuments. 


The Sculptures of the Parthenon. By A. 5. Murray. Pp. xii+173. 17 Plates, 
&e. London: John Murray, 1963. £1 1s. 


‘ discussion of the sculptures of the Parthenon is based on a course of lectures addressed 
οἰ κεν of the Royal Aeademny, and is planned ‘on artistic more than on archaeological . 


ἘΠ᾿ ae aise | ὖ 

Ithaca or Leucas? [University of Missouri Studies. Vol. II. No. 1], By W.G. 

Mayty. Pp. 52. 4 plans. University of Missouri. 1903, $1.00. 9  . | 

Augustus ; the Life and Times of the Founder of the Roman Empire (8.0. 63-a.D, 4). 
By E. S. ΒΗ ΟΚΒΌΒΘΗ. Pp. xii+318. 9 Plates. London : Fisher Unwin, 1908. 165. 


The Athenian Drama. Translations of: (1) The Oresteia of Aeschylus. By 
G. C. W. Warr. Pp. liii+220. 13 plates. 1900 —(2) Sophocles. By 7. 5. PHILLI- 


MoRE. Pp. Ixxxvi+215. 9 plates. 1902—(3) Euripides. By G. Murray ὩΣ 
Pp. Ixviii+355. 7 plates. 1902. London: Allen. 7s. 6d. each net. ὃ τ “ 
+ + Coan 


᾿ . 
Z 
’ 
Ν μι ὦ 4 A 

Ca 
ἐ ι «Fath st RAE 6 all 
: i δ δ 9 
li oe, 


J. H. 85. Vor. XXIII (1903) Ρι. | 


EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS 


J. Η. 5. Vor. XXIII (1903) Ρι. I 


eer ἃ 
7 ; ae 
Att sete! 


— 


EARLY SELEUCID PORTRAITS 


J.H.S. VOL. XXIII. (1903) 


PL 


THE OLDFIELD HEAD OF APOLLO 


J.H.S. VOL. XXIII. (19903). PL IV. 


28 


NEOLITHIC WARE FROM KNOSSOS. 


ΞΘΟΘΘΟΝῊ WOwSsd 


Ξϑι 0 NVONIW 


J.H.S. VOL. XXII. (1903) PL. VI. 


“SOSSONM WOdS 


ieee ve 


e #408, 


0 60 Mee 
£ 8 4 


- 


AY3110d NVONIW 


MINOAN POT 


J.H.S. νοι. ΧΧΙΙ. (1903) PL. Vil. 


».. A Κὶς. 


ERTS Dry, 


Zea boeeesre 
4: 


A 
= 
PA 
¢ 
oe 


OM KNOSSOS. 


PL. VIII. 


(1903). 


JHS. VOL. ΧΧΙΙ. 


HEAD OF BRONZE FROM CERIGOTTO. 


Ρι. ΙΧ. 


J.H.S. VOL. XXIII. (1903). 


‘OLLOSIYSO WOYS 3NLVLS 3ZNOUS 


re 
a >. ,» 
Sa 
oo <S 


- 


. 


>» 


‘ 
¥ 


» 


1% ᾿ 
ι 
ae 


THE STATUES FROM CERIGOTTO.! 
[Puates VIITI., [X.] 


I, THE bronze Hermes recovered from the wreck off Cerigotto is one of 
those works which must be judged from internal evidence alone : no reference 
to it has as yet been found in the ancient authors, we have no hint as to the 
city from which it originally came, no inscription to give us a clue to the 
name of the artist, 

It is at once apparent that the style shows no trace of severity, much 
less of archaism. It is therefore by some considered to be a work of the 
4th century. The figure is rather above life size; it represents a young 
man, nude, resting the main weight of the body on the left leg while his 
right is slightly bent: there is however no forward motion suggested, the 
Hermes is standing with a somewhat languid grace. The right arm is raised 
and is extended half outwards, half sideways, while the head is also turned 
a little towards the right, thus displaying the muscles of the neck (see «7.1.5. 
vol, XXIII. Pl. IX.) The left hand may have held a caduceus, which would 
dispel any doubt as to identification, but apart from such an attribute the 
whole character and treatment of the face seem to suggest a God and not 
a human athlete. The indications of a violent and passionate nature which 
Scopas used with such effect are smoothed over or fined away, while in 
the features and expression the intellectual rather than the animal side of 
human nature is emphasised. 

This seems an insuperable objection to the assignment of this work to 
Scopas by Dr. Waldstein, who is however probably right in supposing that 
here Hermes is represented as the God of Oratory, Yet though we see him 
exerting his eloquence rather than his muscles, he is mighty in chest and 
limbs, as befits one who was also the God of the Palaestra and the messen- 
ger of Zeus. He might indeed appear to be the embodiment in bronze of 
the verse of Horace :— 


Mercuri, facunde nepos Atlantis, 

Qui feros cultus hominum recentum 

Voce formasti catus et decorae 
More Palaestrae. 


1 This article reproduces .n substance an but modified to suit some recent publications. 
account of these statutes written two yearsago, For Plates VIII, IX, see Part I. of this Vol, 


HS.—VOL, XXIII. Q 


218 τὰς, T. FROST 


So striking is his athletic character that Dr. Waldstein has dwelt on his 
manly and vigorous nature in contrast to the Hermes of Praxiteles, whom, he 
taunts with effeminacy, and ‘whose beauty,’ he says, ‘is apt to wane if not 
to pall.’ A comparison between these two works is obviously one of the first 
steps in any criticism of the Cerigotto statue, although Dr. Waldstein himself _ 
no longer assigns the newly discovered work to the Praxitelean school. 

The face of the bronze is oval and Praxitelean in outline: the hair is” 
short, curly, and upstanding; the forehead broad, the nose fine but strong, 
the eyes deep-set. But the analogy to the Praxitelean Hermes is by no 
means close in all points: the mouth is very short and slightly opened; 
the lips are fine, but cut so that the red part is broad; the upper lip is very 
short, and is prettily worked like a Cupid’s bow, while the grooves from the 
nostril are shown. The chin is firm but pointed. It is neither broad and 
heavy as in the Doryphoros nor so long and deep as that of Apollo Belvedere, 
nor is it bossy ; it is different, too, from that of the Olympian Hermes and 1s 
without his dimple. This face is beautiful and the effect is striking, yet 
when compared with his rival we miss the hand οὗ ἃ master. There is not 
nearly so much modelling, such care of details, nor such artistic finish: for 
example the surface about the temples which Praxiteles renders so beautifully 
is unnoticed in the bronze: but though some details may be omitted, others 
seem to suffer not so much from want of care as from want of mind to put 
into the work. The eye-lids, for instance, in the bronze are most carefully 
treated: thé lashes, too, are shown by a row of minute notches, while the 
lashes on the lower lid are also marked, But if we look at the marble the 
difference is seen at once: there the lids, and not only the lids but the whole 
surface round the eye is treated with such skill, and given such a distinctive 
character, that though the circumlitio would enhance the eye’s beauty it 
would add nothing fresh to its expression; whereas if the bronze were to 
lose its eyes the glance would lose half its meaning. The same lack of life 
is shown even more strikingly in the hair. The early masters (e.g. in the 
Aeginetan bronze head in the National Museum) tried to represent each hair ; 
the sculptor of the Delphian charioteer uses the hair on the forehead and 
round the ears to form a sort of lace pattern; it is not hair, but it forms good 
material for drawing and design. In the 5th century they kept it close 
and short. Praxiteles adopted quite another method; far from being 
‘sketchy’ he represents hair more successfully than any of his predecessors. 
In the Hermes, the Eubuleus, and the Hygieia, we find the same Praxitel- 
ean method used to produce three quite different effects :—a number of locks 
are shown in masses, which are not grained, while the play of light and 
shade is skilfully employed to give the general impression, About this time, 
too, the hair seems to have begun to stand up in shorter or longer locks, as 
may be seen in the Olympian Hermes and in the bronze Satyr in Munich, 
(This treatment must be distinguished from the Lysippean hair which stands 
up to fall down again, as in the Zeus, Poseidon, and Alexander heads.) 

In our bronze the hair is short and stands up abruptly: no triangular 
scheme is formed, though over the middle of the forehead it is higher than 


THE STATUES FROM CERIGOTTO. 219 


at the sides, but a pattern over each side of the brow is formed of as it were 
Gothic arches of short upstanding locks, while just in the middle the hair is 
very short and stands up straight: the rest of the head is covered with short 
curly locks, The effect however is not good: there is no life in the design: 
this is partly because the pattern is too mechanical, partly because the locks 
are grained, 

It seems as if the artist had the Praxitelean idea in his mind without 
understanding that to adapt it to the requirements of bronze in this modified 
form was to spoil it. The influence of the athletic schools on the figure is 
striking: the shoulders are broad, and the chest deep and massive: the arms 
are very powerful, All this upper part of the body is more fully grown and 
highly developed than the face would have led us to expect. Yet the arms 
are not very happy 1 in design or execution: the raised right forearm when 
seen from above is ungraceful, while the wrists are rather coarse. The first 
and middle fingers of the right hand show curious marks, but it is difficult to 
make out what object it held. The hips are strongly marked, the legs are 
graceful and well-shaped, but hardly perhaps as powerful in proportion as the 
arms. The heavy abdominal muscles are due chiefly to modern restoration. 

The type of build of the Hermes of Cerigotto is more obviously athletic 
than the Hermes of Praxiteles. Neither is in hard training nor for the 
moment exerting physical force, but each shows the result of careful training 
of mind and body, and sets before us the Greek ideal of what a man should be. 
Above all things the Greek demanded that an ideal man should be what we 
term ‘all-round,’ that all his faculties should be symmetrically developed. 

How then is this ideal realised in the two works? If we can answer 
this we shall catch a glimpse of that which lies at the back of all points of 
technical likeness or contrast, the ideal in the artist’s mind. 

Perhaps the most striking quality of the Hermes of Praxiteles is his 
harmony, his complete harmony with his surroundings and in himself. Of 
his beauty there can be no doubt: yet it has often been asserted that his face 
is too sentimental and that the whole composition is listless and dreamy, 

Many, too, maintain that his body, though well proportioned, is heavy 
and lacks character, It is necessary to consider these charges for a moment 
and the grounds on which they are based. The whole composition shows a 
mood, and the expression and pose suggest a reverie: but there is much in 
the face and form to show that this is but one aspect of the God: it is not 
that the artist shows one mood only, he has emphasised one and suggested 
the others, There is strength as well as charm in the whole personality: the 
interest of the work lies not in the motive of the group but in the type 
represented. In that type we see the triumphant culmination of μουσική 
and γυμναστική : in the whole composition, style, and subject we can trace 
the mind of the artist and the tastes of his public: it is the embodiment of 
Greek ideals; Greek art stands or falls with the Hermes. 

In rendering the forms of tlie body the archaic masters tried 2 produce 
the appearance of great strength by unduly contracting muscles in repose. 
Praxiteles ον far better, and also realised that hard ridges suitable for a 

. ῳ 2 


220 Ἃ. T. FROST 


Zeus or Heracles would be inappropriate for his subject: the stronger, too, a 
man is, the greater is the contrast between action and repose. It is true that 
it isthe duty of an artist to open the eyes of those who cannot see, and that if 
he does not find his ideal in nature he must put it into his work: but Praxiteles 
has put into his Hermes all the indications of power and agility consistent 
with the harmony of his picture, and should sudden stress arise the dreamer 
would change in a flash to the God of the Palaestra and the swift-footed 
slayer of Argus, 

In the bronze we find a different type and a different nature. The 
artist instead of showing the perfect blending of the highest gifts of mind 
and body in pensive but momentary rest, seems rather to have expressed his 
meaning by emphasising different qualities in different parts. Thus he gives 
his statue a face which shows the refined and intellectual side of his 
character: the mighty chest indicates physical strength, but scarcely seems to 
belong to the same being. The statue has neither the harmony nor the 
charm of the Praxitelean Hermes, 

Thus the statue cannot possibly have been the work of Praxiteles, 
Besides, the well-known passage in Lucian Eixoves 6 runs :—‘ The hair and 
the forehead and the finely-pencilled eyebrows he will allow her to keep as 
Praxiteles made them, and in the melting gaze of the eyes with their bright 
and joyous expression he will also preserve the spirit of Praxiteles. In each 
one of these particulars the bronze stands in the sharpest contrast to the 
Hermes of Olympia. Not only that, but the very qualities which Lucian 
selects as those in which the master excelled are among those in which 
the sculptor of the Hermes from Cerigotto is least happy. The hair 
we have already noticed as being artificially and not very successfully 
treated. The forehead is not so carefully modelled, and also is almost 
without the swelling over the eyes which forms so noticeable a feature 
in the Olympian Hermes, There 15. ἃ slight indication of the trait in the 
bronze, but in quite another manner. 

The eyebrows are differently treated from any that we possess of the 
best period. In the 5th century they are marked by a distinct ridge, and 
this was continued more or less in the 4th. The eyebrows of the 
Praxitelean heads that we have are sharply defined. In the bronze, on the 
other hand, it is difficult to say where the forehead ends and the cavity of 
the eye begins, This is not due to corrosion, for the eyebrows are still shown, 
not by a ridge but by the hairs drawn separately on the bronze. The eyes, 
which are brown and intent, have nothing in common with the description 
given by Lucian, nor are they what we should expect from one who ‘ tantum 
circumlitioni tribuebat.’ 

Finally, the pose is not characteristic of Praxiteles. The earlier statues 
stood firmly upon both feet, the 5th century saw the variations of Stand- und 
Spielbein. Praxiteles introduced what was in effect a third leg: this gave a 
fine opportunity for introducing the lines he loved. This pose is much 
varied, The Sauroktonos though alert and in action leans on a tree, In 
the Satyr the position is more complicated, for he first rests on a tree and 


. 
Δ — ill ee dl, ee ee ae 


THE STATUES FROM CERIGOTTO. 221 


then leans away from it. In the Hermes from Cerigotto there is no extraneous 
support. To sum up:—The statue has not the finish of a masterpiece, nor 
did the limbs when separate look so well as they do together. The faults are 
those of a kind which no great artist would commit, while such characteristics 
as the treatment of the hair and the rounding and softening of all ridges are 
not those of the 4th century, but later. 

It is not then to Praxiteles or the Praxitelean circle that we must look for 
parallels to our statue ; much less to the Scopaic. Dr. Waldstein in an article in 
the ‘ Illustrated London News, (June 1903) assigns the Hermes of Cerigotto 
to the school of Scopas, if not to the master himself. . He adduces a number 
of works that have been held to reflect the Scopaic style to a greater or less 
extent, apparently ignoring the inconvenient fact that the discovery of the 
Agias has caused these heads, except those from Tegea, to be reconsidered. At 
present our best evidence of the style of Scopas is that of the Tegean heads, as 
Dr. Waldstein himself acknowledges ; but the most characteristic features of 
these heads are their extreme squareness, depth of skull, bony framework, 
massive jaw, and the great roll of flesh over the eyes that sweeps down 
covering the outer corners of the lids and imparting a wonderful sense of 
intensity and passion. With every one of these features the head of the 
Hermes from Cerigotto is in direct contrast, as even a photograph, if it be 
large enough, will show. It is not then to either Praxiteles or Scopas that the 
statue should be assigned. 

It is not only that the Praxitelean type is inadequately rendered : as regards 
date that might not be conclusive; but it is the distinct trace of later motives 
and mannerisms, which shows that we must look to a later time when other 
traditions and other tastes influenced the artist’s hand. And here we shall 
not seek in vain. The Hellenistic head placed on the statue of Aristogeiton 
in the Naples museum affords a strong likeness. If we allow that the 
one head belongs to a warfior in fierce and passionate action, and the 
other to the God of graceful oratory, so that in the one the animal nature is 
emphasised, while in the other it is fined away, then we can see that they 
both belong to the same period and the same type. 

In both the hair is shown by short, grained, upstanding locks (as is to be 
seen in many works reproducing 4th century originals, ¢.g., the Meleager 
type, and a Heracles published in Brit. Mus. Marbles III., Pl. 12); the treat- 
ment of the upper lip and mouth generally is the same, there is the same 
type of chin, and in both the top of the head is flattened, as opposed to the 
dome-shaped cranium of the Hermes at Olympia. The Aristogeiton is, however, 
nearer to the Apoxyomenos type than is the Cerigotto statue, which seems to 
have drawn its inspiration from the Praxitelean school. The face of the 
tyrannicide is less oval than that of the bronze, though more so than that of 
the Apoxyomenos. This difference might be expected from the nature of the 
subject. 

It is, then, to the Hellenisti¢ period that I would assign the Hermes; a 
time suited to the dramatic nature of the statue and its need of an imaginary 
audience ; a time when men had already begun to look back and adapt the 


222 . -K. T. FROST 


old ideas to form a fresh design; an age of many types and many 
traditions, but one in which artists could still be found who could produce 
work beautiful as this Hermes unquestionably is, while looking to the earlier 
masters for their inspiration. 

II, Although the Hermes has naturally claimed by far the largest share of 
popular and artistic attention, yet other works of great interest come from the 
same find, foremost among which are some bronze statuettes belonging 
apparently to widely different dates and styles. Of these the largest and 


Fic. 1.—PoytLEITAN STATUETTE. 


most imposing is the nude athletic victor reproduced on πίναξ 14 in the | 


᾿Ἐφημερίς of 1902. The eyes, lips, and nipples were inserted in some other 
materials and are now missing; the fingers of the right hand have been 
much damaged ; any attributes that may have been held have also disappeared, 
and the patina has been destroyed by oe action of the sea; otherwise - the 
statuette is intact. (Fig. 1.) | ΠΣ ' * 


. 
—— = lc OT ae 


nl i id 


THE STATUES FROM CERIGOTTO. 223 


When first discovered and before it had been thoroughly cleaned this 
figure was regarded as a work of the 5th century B.c. The simple 
pose, the close-lying curly hair, the broad, rather square forms of the 
torso, the well-defined muscles over the hips, the muscular .thick-set limbs, 
the shape of the head, and the proportion of the legs to the body all suggest 
the influence of Polycleitus. This supposition is further strengthened by the 
fact that we see in this work the favourite subject of the Argive school, the 
youthful nude athletic victor with fillet and attribute. 

The main weight of the body rests upon the left leg, throwing the left 
hip into prominence, and causing the line of the body to bend first to the 
right and then to curve back to the left to keep the shoulders even. The 
groove from navel to throat, which is clearly shown, is another well-known 
mannerism of the Peloponnesian sculptors. This curve, however, is by no 
means strongly emphasised, for the right foot is firmly on the ground, and 
the right leg is no Spielbein, though the knee is slightly bent. The lines, 
moreover, produced by this posture are unpleasing, while the arms are 
distinctly stiff; the left hand evidently held some attribute, perhaps a wreath ; 
the right is open and extended and may have held some light object, but no 
trace of it remains. Both arms are partly bent at the elbow. When first 
published the pose was compared with that of the Idolino, but the comparison 
only serves to emphasise the lack of grace in the statuette, 

However, this inferiority in design may be accounted for by the fact that 
our bronze is a minor work: the questions to be decided are, first, whether 
it belongs to the Argive school, and secondly, whether it is a work of the 5th 
century. 

The figure reproauces as we have noticed most of the main external 
characteristics of the Polycleitan victors; it also reminds us both in pose 
and subject of the earlier victor from Ligurio. Yet although the Ligurio 
figure is obviously earlier, as is shown by the treatment of the hair, the 
sketchy archaic features, and the clumsiness of its limbs, yet its pose is more 
natural and pleasing, and the modelling is more carefully executed. Why 
are we confronted with greater knowledge but Jess care? Should we expect 
such a tendency in the development of the Argive school? Prof. Furtwiingler 
has shown (Winckelmannsprogramme IV. Fest. 1890) how the way was 
paved for the ‘canon’ of Polycleitus, nay, how the whole school seemed to be 
tending inevitably towards a canon: the continuity of the traditions of the 
Argive school both before and after Polycleitus is one of its most striking 
characteristics. What was it, then, which raised that master to his 
pre-eminent position? His mastery of bronze technique and his infusion of 
style into the slowly but surely developing type. 

The Diadumenos from Delos with all his strength and weight is full of 
grace and latent agility: a combination of qualities which marks the difference 
between good Argive work and later, especially Graeco-Roman, adaptations : 
it is by this standard that our bronze must be judged if it is to be assigned 
to the 5th century. The Argive sculptors could show great muscular 
development without hardness or dryness in modelling, weight without 


224 ' K. T. FROST 


clumsiness, grace and charm without undue softening: this is because each 
line is clear and definite, nothing is ever slurred over: Polycleitus is 
never unfeeling or careless. Let us look, for example, at the setting of the 
arms into the body of the Diadumenos from Delos, a work which preserves 
some of the merit of the original and seems to be more of an artist’s sketch 
than a copy hewn out point by point. Contrast this with a good specimen of 
Hellenistic work, the Poseidon from Melos, also in the National Museum at 
Athens. In the latter the arm joins the body and there are muscles on the 
chest, but the effect produced is quite different from the vigour and decision 
of the Diadumenos, where the lines are sharp, clear, and definite over the 
whole frame. Polycleitus knows each muscle, where it begins and where it 
ends, and shows it clearly to those who would otherwise overlook it. Yet 
there is no anatomical display; the spectator is hardly conscious of how 
the effect is produced till he analyses the work more closely. Even then he 
finds no optical delusion, but nature in her best mood with a something 
running through it all which is neither the model, nor the tradition of a 
school, but the artist. So is it always with good work, but especially with 
good 5th century Argive work ; for it was on this finish and accuracy in simple 
self-centred, nude, athletic victors, that Polycleitus and his school based their 
claim to greatness. He relied for his effect neither on technical triumph 
over mechanical difficulties, richness of material, the romantic side of 
physical beauty, nor the expression of the soul. All these elements must 
have been present in his works to a greater or less degree; but his 
fame was founded on his being able to mould a simple torso better, probably, 
than anyone who has ever lived. He had a narrow gamut perfectly 
thought out. 

A statuette does not necessarily reproduce the characteristics of a 
single great master: but in this case we should expect the artistic aims 
to coincide to an unusual degree, for Polycleitus was only the greatest 
and most typical exponent of the Argive art, whose very essence was care 
and finesse combined with breadth of treatment, absence of exaggeration, 
and simple grace. 

In the statuette before us we search in vain for these characteristics. | 
There is none of the Polycleitan’ pose, there is neither life in the figure, 
design in the composition, nor skill, or even care, in the modelling. The 
superficial likenesses to good 5th century work are clear, but the archaic 
simplicity is aimed at and overdone, while all that is good in the artist or his 
school is omitted. The maker of this bronze did not understand the 
traditions of the Argive school, nor did he realise that the old masters had 
chosen simplicity so that their work might rely on excellence alone. 
Everywhere we find this contrast between the subject and the artist, a 
facility in rendering a type, combined with carelessness of execution. 
So severe a condemnation demands more detailed proof. The head conforms 
in outline to the general Polycleitan type as observed in the Doryphoros, 
Diadumenos, Amazon, and kindred works. That is to say it is remarkably 
square in form, the hair is curly and close-lying, the forehead is rather low 


THE STATUES FROM CERIGOTTO. 225 


but broad, while the chin is rounded and heavy. But as soon as we look 
into details we find the most characteristic features in no way recalling 
Polycleitus but treated in a mechanical and perfunctory manner impossible 
in the 5th century, while the hair forms a dead pattern. The neck is the 
worst part of all, it is simply a round pillar to support the head, and is 
wholly without character: neither the trapezius nor sterno-mastoid muscles 
are even indicated. Compare this neck with that of the Delian Diadumenos, 
the Sabouroff bronze, or the Idolino, and it will seem absurd to place in 
their company a work containing so careless a rendering of so important a 
part. The shoulders are broad and square, but the individual muscles are 
scarcely shown ; as to the setting of the arms (the very point in which we 
noticed the Diadumenos excelled), they are simply stuck on. There is 
nothing, except the probable outline of the body, to show where they begin 
or where the trunk ends: nothing is made of the bones or sinews. Yet 
these same arms are not without a kind of merit. The left arm as it hangs 
down has quite a Polycleitan appearance: that is to say it is muscular, 
rather heavy, the biceps are full and long, and the general lines (taken apart 
from the general pose of the figure) are suggestive of strength and beauty. 
But again, these arms will not stand inspection; they are too sketchy: the 
general look is 5th century, but the work shows none of the care and skill 
we should expect. The wrist, too, is rather clumsy, and although some 
object is held in the hand, none of the sinews of the forearm is indicated. 
In the body this lack of thoroughness is even more apparent. The 
pectoral ridge is heavily emphasised, and the nipples were inserted in some 
distinctive material. But the termination of the muscles is indicated by a 
hard, unfeeling groove driven right across the body: while the costal margin, 
the abdominal muscles, and the ilio-pubic line are barely shown, and what 
remains of the belly is hard and leathery: the hip muscles on the other 
hand are strongly marked. All this part of the body is more like the 
Stephanus athlete than any good Greek work, and forms a strong contrast 
not only to the greater works of the best period, but also to the unpretentious 
little victor from Ligurio. Exactly this skill in modelling the torso, which 
is so conspicuously absent in our bronze, is the very point in which the 
Argive school excelled. 

The back is even worse. Good modelling is not attempted, nor is the 
design at all pleasing. A glance at the beautiful bronze Pan in Paris 
(published by Prof. Furtwangler in Rim, Mittheilungen, 111. p. 287) will 
show how impossible it is to assign the two works to the same school and 
time. With the legs we find just the same merits and defects that we find 
in the work-as a whole: their main lines are good, or rather suggest good 
work : they are muscular and belong to the sturdy 5th century Argive, and 
not to the later Lysippean standard : the back of the knee is good in outline. 
But they lack character. Here, as elsewhere in the figure, there is no style, 
no design. Nowhere can one lay a finger on the work and say, ‘this shows 
the artist.’ The limbs are round and soft, the tendons, bones, and muscles 
are not shown : the effect of the whole is good from in front at a distance, 


220 . K. T. FROST 


but that is all. The general result, then, of our investigation is that when 

new and adorned with a gilded circlet, bright eyes, red lips, and a shining 
patina our little athlete would have been a pleasing ornament for the 
drawing-room of a rich but uncritical owner: that it reproduces the type, in 
outline, of the 5th century Argive athletic statues well enough, but that 
when we look into the technique we find both in form and features (especially 
chin, neck, and thighs) that the work is more of the type of the Apollino 
than the Idolino; that the structure is 
hidden or not understood; and that it 
was not the maker’s intention to give 
the idea of rounded softness, which he 
does, but to give the appearance of youth- 
ful but muscular power, which he does 
not. 


This attempt to render a well-known 
and popular type, combined with a lack 
of understanding and a carelessness in 
detail, stamps the work not as a 5th 
century original, but as an object intended 
for the Roman market. 

III. The rather smaller statuette of 
πίναξ 15 contrasts favourably with his 
companion on the preceding plate. He 
has neither the stiffness nor the archaistic 
appearance of the other, while in some 
respects the work shows considerable merit 
(Fig. 2), The preservation is remarkably 
good ; with the exception of some corro- 
sion of the surface, the loss of the attri- 
butes, and the greater part of all the 
fingers of each hand, the figure is practi- 
cally intact : even the eyes are fairly well 
preserved ; the pupils it is true have dis- 
appeared, but the white is still in its 
place. 

The form is that of an athletic young 
man, nude except for some drapery thrown 
over his left shoulder and covering the 
arm, The weight is resting on the right 
leg, while the left reminds us of the scheme of Polycleitua. The head 
is small, being no more than an eighth of the total height. It is half 
turned towards the left. Both the directness of the gaze and the general 
bearing suggest a certain boldness and independence, which, combined 
with the powerful frame and the grace of the design, gives a frank and 
pleasing effect. The middle point of the whole length instead of being 
at the extreme end of the trunk, as in the Doryplhoros, is considerably 


Fic. 2.—Srarvetre oF HERMEs. 


τ Oe OO ee 


THE STATUES FROM CERIGOTTO. 227 


lower. This smallness of head and length of limb point to a date after the 
period uf Lysippus. It has been stated that the work shows traces of the 
influence of Polycleitus. But this phrase is rather misleading: neither the 
build nor the proportions are those of the Polycleitan school: the broad 
treatment of the body, the strong hips, and the muscular limbs do not 
prove anything to the contrary, This figure has acquired nothing from 
Polycleitus that was not the common heritage of all his successors, and what 
traces of his influence survive would have been taken not from him but from 
the well-formed types of the 4th century. Nor should much stress be 
laid on the scheme of Spiel- und Standbein; both the Hermes from Andros 
and the Apollo Belvedere present different adaptations of the same idea, 
though neither has any direct relation to the school of Argos. By the time 
of Lysippus there were a number of well defined types already existing : 
Greek art had been built up by different sculptors at different epochs, each 
of whom contributed something towards the general store of artistic motives 
and technical triumphs. The one thing which cannot be inherited is style : 
that the artist must form for himself, however much he may use the labours 
of his predecessors. 

That Polycleitus. influenced all athletic art in the fourth century, 
especially in the treatment of the torso, seems highly probable; but this torso 
does not bear evidence of being distinctly Polycleitan, while the face shows 
an entirely different treatment. In reality the whole motive of the statuette 
is far removed from that of the Polycleitan works. The mouth is firmly 
closed, the lock is direct, and the pose self-reliant: there is none of the 
modesty almost amounting to shyness that is seen in so many of the Argive 
youths; nor is the chin of that full, heavy kind so noticeable in the 
Diadumenos: moreover the drapery on the left arm is foreign to that type. 

If we can trace Polycleitan influence at all we can certainly see other 
and more powerful influences’as well. 

The hair is quite sketchy and does not prove anything (except that it is 
of the best period), In the forehead, however, with its pronounced bar, in 
the short, wide-open eye with its keen glance, in the short mouth, in the 
depth of the head, and in the strongly pronounced bonework of the jaw and 
chin (which is bossy rather than round), the traditions of Lysippus seem to be 
felt. This idea is borne out by the powerful frame and muscular limbs, The 
type of man represented is more that of the Agias, though the proportions are 
longer, than that of the Doryphoros or our copy of the Apoxyomenos. 

The artist was not without some skill and pride in his work: the mouth 
is not an unfeeling slit as is so often the case in late bronzes; it has some 
design. The neck, too, possesses some character, and is very different from 
the meaningless drum on which the head of the companion figure is stuck. 
The shoulders are broad with an upright and easy bearing ; the chest is deep, 
the waist and hips seem strong and supple, the back also is treated with some 
care; but on the whole the modelling of the body is not first-rate. We must 
make allowance for the condition of the surface, but the corrosion has not 
gone very deep, except in one or two places. Quite enough is left to show 


228 | “K. T. FROST 


that in comparison with any really good piece of work the modelling was 
superficial and sketchy, though pleasing in its main lines.. The principal 
muscles of the back are indicated, but nothing is made out of them to increase 
the beauty of the statue; the chest muscles and costal margin are shown, 
so doubtless were the abdominal muscles, but not with any assurance or 
tlecision ; the lines are there, more or less, but they do not mean much; the 
anatomy contributes little to the general design. The muscles over the hips 
are strongly marked, but the pubic line is not decided, in fact it leaves the 
abdomen rather triangular in shape, which was not the custom with 4th 
century bronzes. This is the more striking as we are here dealing with a full- 
grown and powerful man, whereas after Polycleitus that feature is given to 
boys in Greek art, perhaps a little prematurely, as, for example, in the Sabouroff 
bronze. However, the artist has avoided the worse evil of driving an 
exaggerated, unfeeling g groove in a sort of semi-circle from one iliac crest to 
the other, as is so often done in Roman reproductions. A good specimen of 
this latter treatment, among many others, may be found in a little marble 
Dionysus torso belonging to the Finlay collection, and of evident Graeco- 
Roman work. In that case the surface is polished like ivory, the modelling 
is hard and mannered, and, although the torso obviously belongs to quite a 
boy, the short broad lower belly is bounded by this groove, which makes no 
distinction between the surface over the iliac crest and that ‘of the softer 
tissues and ligaments of the body. Yet when intact the Dionysus might 
have looked pretty enough to a casual observer in a garden. 

Our bronze, then, has avoided much of the hardness of later times, but 
falls far short of the care and precision of good Greek work even in minor 
objects. 

This can be seen at once if we glance again at the victor from :Ligurio. 
He still shows much of the clumsiness of archaism, and is the work 
neither of a genius nor of a great master; also he is smaller in actual size 
than the figure now beforé us; but the torso is moulded with the greatest 
truth and care, though the limbs are somewhat dull. The line of the belly 
is not emphasised, it is true, but then he was before Polycleitus. In our 
figure the limbs continue the effect of the body :—good in general form and 
outline, but the execution in detail does not correspond to the skill of the 
design. The setting, for example, of the knee is good, especially when seen 
from behind, and some of the main tendons are shown, but the individual 
muscles round the knee and along the front of the thigh are not: whereas 
much is made out of them in Greek work. In the Polycleitan statues the 
muscles above the knee are especially noticeable, while as early as the 
‘ Apollo’ of Tenea we find them carefully worked. The sculptor of that statue 
knew more, and omitted more, than any of the earlier artists who fashioned 
‘Apollos. He uses the muscles and bones of the two legs to form a design, 
and this sign of the artist stamping his work with his own personality is what 
marks out this ‘ Apollo,’ and gives it its merit. The artist, though archaic, had 
style; he had learnt from Nature, formed his ideal and then gone back to 
Nature with a preconceived idea which guided his hand and art. Our bronze 


THE STATUES FROM CERIGOTTO, 229 


is content with a leg intrinsically more life-like, but artistically poorer. The 
same faults appear in the arms: though they seem so powerful, and though, 
especially in the right upper arm, they show some care in modelling, they are 
more rounded than the type of man would lead us to expect, The effect of 
the whole suggests that we have an artist of skill and experience, but that 
he had not attained this type by careful study of details, by thinking the 
thing out, but rather that he is reproducing, or at least adapting, well-known 
types that lay ready to his hand, This becomes clearer when we reflect that 
the pose of the figure is by no means unique; in the same museum, quite 
close to the statue, are works which afford a close parallel: in fact, our bronze 
belongs to a well-defined series, examples of which abound both in marble and 
bronze, through whose help we can reach a safe interpretation. 

We find a great number of somewhat similar figures resting the weight 
mainly on the leg (usually the right), and having some drapery thrown over 
the left arm. 

The earlier of these had been long supposed to point to some type 
which originated in the 4th century ; the discovery of the Hermes of Praxiteles 
confirmed that supposition and showed that it was with the Hermes that the 
type began, 

The later examples continue the motive, which seems to have become 
fixed, but do not reproduce the Praxitelean style. We find Lysippean and 
Graeco-Roman figures of this type which are in no way connected with 
Praxiteles in point of style. Now, our bronze clearly held something in his 
right hand, and even more clearly carried in his left a staff of some kind 
which lay back and rested partly on his elbow, Not only is his left hand 
hollowed to receive it, but there is a deep groove in a fold of the drapery to 
support such an attribute, which can hardly be other than the κηρύκειον, The 
fact that he holds it not in his right (as on the sculptured pillar-drum from 
Ephesus) but in his left, seems to show that he held some other object in his 
right hand, a conclusion we have already come to from the form and position 
of the hand itself. This object was in all probability the purse which Hermes 
so often carries in later works of art. 

A close parallel is to be found in a bronze in the British Museum 
(No, 825 in the catalogue) one of the best of Roman bronze works. Here, 
too, more styles than one are to be seen, so much so that Professor Furtwiingler 
considers the statuette Polycleitan, while the British Museum catalogue calls it 
Lysippean. Perhaps the simplest explanation is that the Peloponnesian type, 
of which Polycleitus was the great expounder, left its influence more or less on 
most subsequent schools when the nude male type in a simple pose was 
represented, just as it certainly influenced the Athenians of the 4th and 5th 
centuries. 

Thissbronze in the British Museum is nearer the Polycleitan style than 
the statuette we are considering, gd it does not belong to the Polycleitan 
school a whit the more, 

Another work in the same δῶν is No. 315 in the Bibliothéque at 
Paris. Here, also, the purse and caduceus were once held but are now lost ; 


280 APES ἘΚ. T. FROST 


while both in Paris and London are a host of Graeco-Roman bronzes that 
reproduce the type to a greater or less extent. 

It is a Hermes, then, that we have before us, holding the caduceus in i 
left hand and the purse in his right. 

The Greeks, it is true, were familiar with Hermes ἀγοραῖος, but the 
purse seems to have been placed in his hands by the Romans after he had 
been identified with Mercurius the God of Trade. When this first came 
about is uncertain, but no instance occurs on pure Greek monuments, while 
in Roman times such a representation was common enough. 

- The reason, then, for the difference of workmanship between the twa 
statuettes from Cerigotto seems to be due not so much to their date as to the 
object of their production. In the larger the artist was trying to reproduce 
a work in a set style which he did not quite understand, and with which he 
had not much sympathy : in the smaller he was set to make ‘a Hermes’ as 
best he could, and he has produced a pleasing work following no one particular 
style, but with reminiscences of many. After about 300 B.c., unless a work 
is a copy or is frankly archaistic, it is scarcely fair to say this work is 
Polycleitan, or that is Scopaic. There are a number of types, it is true, that 
are associated chiefly with a few great names, and we try to get at the style 
of early masters by working back through later echoes ; but these had become 
common stock for sculptors who often reproduced a motive originated by one 
type in the style of another. Our bronze is one of the most pleasing of 
recently discovered works; while to the Roman public, even if this were a 
would-be Greek statue, there would have been no anomaly in a Hermes 
carrying the purse which they associated with his name. Such an attribute 
would confirm the effect independently produced by the style of the actual 
work : namely, that here we have a charming little figure produced to meet 
the taste of the day by an artist of considerable merit in his line, who knew 
something of the earlier traditions; but that this Hermes was intended 
neither for the criticisms of Greek fellow-citizens, nor for a collector of 
antiques, but to adorn the house of some cultivated Roman. 

IV. The only marble figure recovered from Cerigotto in anything 
approaching a good state of preservation presents some interesting problems, 
especially as to its interpretation. 

The left side of the statue is eaten away by the action of the water and 
only enough of the arm and leg remains to enable us to judge the general 
direction of these limbs. 

The type of man represented is by no means ideal ; it is quite impossible 
that he is intended for a god, hero, or athletic victor. He might, however, 
be a hunter or a Lapith, or part of a genre group representing boys wrestling 
or playing some game, The pose is, as far as I can discover, without parallel 
in ancient sculpture still preserved. I had wondered whether it could 
represent Actaeon crouching and peering through the trees at Artemis, re- 
moving an intervening bough with his left hand and holding a hunting spear in 
his right. But apart from other objections, it is not likely that a sculptor ofa 
late period and mediocre rank would treat such a familiar subject in a 


THE STATUES FROM CERIGOTTO. 231 


strikingly original way. M. Castriotis considers that the figure represents a 
wrestler, in spite of the inactivity of the right hand and the want of concen- 
tration in the face. Dr, Waldstein conjectured that it is a crouching warrior, 
and compares a Lapith from the Parthenon delivering an upward stab with 
his sword, The Lapith, however, is only taken from a drawing of Carrey, 
and is in a wholly different position, while the ha!f-amused, half-ribald 
expression on this statue is not that of a warrior in deadly conflict. 

Besides this I am convinced from several careful examinations of the 
inside of the hand that it held nothing: the want of any indication of effort 


Fic. 3.—MARBLE FicurE FroM CERIGOTTO. 


in the forearm confirms this, so does the marble left to support the fingers 
and thumb: for if an object were held in the hand it would render such bars 
superfluous, 

M. Kabbadias, while admitting that the statue represents neither 
wrestler nor combatant, finds a ‘satisfactory explanation’ in the idea ‘ that 
the youth is shading his eyes with his left hand and gazing into the 
distance,’ But the position of the left arm and shoulder make the shading 


232 q - K. Τὶ FROST 


of the eyes with the hand difficult if not impossible, as a practical experiment 
will show, while there is no trace on the forehead of the hand having touched 
the brow as it certainly would have done, The eyes also are not fixed on an 
object in the distance ; they are giving a quick upward glance, as is suggested 
by the whole position of the head. That view seems much nearer the truth 
which considers that the statue represents a ‘gamin’ feeling for a stone to 
throw at another rascal. The. objections, however, to this are that it does 
not explain the action of the left arm, and that the right hand ought to give 
a clearer indication of its meaning; while the opponent must either be 
imagined or, if in a group, be unnaturally close, _ 

To all these theories there are two main objections, First, the statue 
does not represent motion, but momentarily arrested action. There is not 
enough play of muscle shown in any part of his body to indicate sudden 
rising or stooping, while the whole right arm is not doing anything and 
has no immediate intention of doing anything. Secondly, the head is 
thrown up suddenly, The curve of the back and the angles both of the 
neck and head are not those of a man stooping while keeping a watch 
on his opponent. I believe the true explanation to be that the figure once 
formed a group of ἀστραγαλίζοντες. The player was in the act of picking 
up his die, but has stopped suddenly to hurl some gibe accompanied by a 
gesture of disdain at his opponent, who has probably made a remark. 
᾿Αστραγαλίξοντες formed a well-known subject, and supplied the motive of 
one of the ‘most famous groups by Polycleitus; they would also be most 
appropriate for a garden, for which this statue was probably intended. 
This theory would be consistent with the fellow’s age and character, and it 
wouldaffordasimple explanation of the expression, the suddenly upturned head, 
the action of both arms, and the general pose. In rendering the body the 
artist has attained considerable success, chiefly through not being too 
ambitious. There is no high ideal or treatment, yet the sculptor must have 
possessed a considerable degree of artistic feeling and sympathy. This is 
seen best from behind (which fact strengthens the impression that this figure 
was originally face to face with another) where the treatment of rounded 
outlines in the back and loins is distinctly pleasing, 

As to the period to which the statue must be assigned it is difficult to 
find definite evidence, The tendency at first was to call it a Rhodian or 
Asiatic work of the 2nd century B.c, Without actually denying this view 
I would rather suggest that the work is good Graeco-Roman. The figure, it is 
true, has merit, but not beyond the powers of a sculptor with good traditions 
and models, whether he lived in Hellenistic times or later. This view is 
supported by secondary evidence :—The figure was evidently left partly 
unfinished to prevent breakage during transport; when shipped it would 
therefore have been but recently carved : but the ship which carried it carried 
also’ some statues, as the replica of the Farnese Heracles, of obviously 
Graeco-Roman date. So it seems probable that the statue was originally 
designed for what would in any case haye been its final resting-place, a 
Roman pleasure-ground, : 


THE STATUES FROM CERIGOTTO. 233 


V. Among the large bronze statues which sank in the ship only the Hermes 
has survived: several fragments however of the others have been found, of 
which the most interesting is the head from a portrait, in good preservation, 
and now mounted on a pedestal in the National Museum at Athens. The 
features are strongly marked and forcible, and the portrait possesses a certain 
individuality which seems to claim our attention. 

The head belongs to a man of middle age, bearded, and of a rather un- 
kempt appearance. The face is broad, the eyes are small and placed wide 


Fig. 4.—PoORTRAIT OF A PHILOSOPHER. 


apart, the nose is thick and aquiline, and forms the sharp angle with the brow 
that is found in some Hellenistic philosophers. The character of this head 
has undergone a complete transformation since its first discovery, owing to 
the amount of cleaning which the action of the sea has rendered necessary. 
The manner in which the metal had oxidised produced the effect of a face 
rather square in outline with a thick bushy beard; naturally it was regarded 
as a portrait of a boxer, but the removal of the scoria with which the surface 
was covered has made it clear that this identification can no longer be main- 
H.S,—VOL, XXIII. R 


284 K. T. FROST 


tained. The face is by no means that of a pugilist. The rough hair and 


beard show that the portrait is one of a Greek philosopher and the general ἢ 


type belongs to the 3rd century. 


The patina has been destroyed, but in spite of corrosion the treatment of 


the surface can be clearly seen. The eyes, as usual, were inserted in different 


materials and are fortunately still preserved with the loss of only the pupils. . 


The face is strikingly realistic, there is no attempt to eliminate the acci- 


dental: on the contrary personal traits such as the furrows on the brow, the * 


folds of the skin under the eyes, and the lines and marking of the cheeks are 
emphasised, while there is little or no attempt to idealise the subject or to 
form a type. Neither the motive nor the realism makes it impossible that 
this head is an original work of the late 4th or early 3rd century: the 
difference of aim between this and the portrait of Pericles, after Cresilas, is 
obvious, but the type here shown closely resembles the so-called Heracleitus 
and Democritus, both fine 8rd century bronzes (Plates 157-160 in F. Bruck- 
mann’s series of Greek and Roman portraits).1 But in the head before us 
the workmanship is not only realistic, it is coarse. 

The lines, for example, on the forehead are made quite carelessly, there 
is no feeling for the texture of the brow, there is nowhere any delicacy in 
modelling the surface. It is the same with the eyes: they seem to have a 
certain amount of life, but that is due to the colour of the material rather 
than to the skill of the sculptor : the lids are mechanical and clumsy, even after 
making due allowance for the action of the sea. If this head be compared 
with our copy of the portrait of Sophocles, it lacks the dignity and beauty 
of the marble, nor does the face possess the force of the portrait of Demosthenes. 
The bronze head of a Satyr at Munich shows how inferior this work is both 
in artistic finish and bronze technique. A most instructive comparison 
is also furnished by a work in the same museum at Athens, the well-known 
head of a boxer from Olympia. Both are of bronze, both are portraits, and 
both are bearded : but here the resemblance ends. The beard and moustache 
of the boxer are most skilfully and carefully worked : the short curls bristle 
with defiance and the general effect of hair is at the same time well rendered. 
The hair on the face of this bronze from Cerigotto has no character at all, 
while it forms no design: it merely hangs down in long thick locks, for the 
most part roughly divided in the middle by a groove. The hair over 
the forehead and on the temples is treated in a similar mauner. There was 
a splendid opportunity for effect in this tangled mass which is not inappro- 
priate to the rugged features, but no attempt is made to form a scheme, or to 
use light and shade after the manner of the Pergamenes. ἢ 


This lack of imagination in the hair and want of finish in the modelling, — 


which is noticeable more or less in all the statues from Cerigotto, recall some 
_of the later bronzes from Pompeiirather than good Greek work. The portrait 


4 For this comparison I am indebted to Miss McDowall. 


ὼ 4. , ° 
ΟΝ ae .: 


THE STATUES FROM CERIGOTTO. 235 


of Jucundus of Pompeii, although it represents a very different individual, 
shares nevertheless many of the characteristics of this head. The small 
staring eyes, the deep hard lines on the forehead, the rude realism, and the 
lack of feeling in handling the’surface combined with a careless or mechanical 
reproduction of details are common to both these works, in striking contrast to 
the above-mentioned heads of the 8rd and 4th centuries. We see, then, in 
this head from Cerigotto, a work which at first promises to prove an interesting 
portrait but which, though not without a certain effectiveness, has little artistic 
merit: it possesses neither majesty nor charm, it represents merely a ‘senex 
promissa barba horrenti capillo.’ 

Just as this ship seems to have contained adaptations of 5th century 
athletes, so I believe this head to be a reproduction of a well known 3rd 
century philosophic type, and to belong to much the same class as those later 
portraits which adorned private libraries at Pompeii. 


From our examination of these five statues it is evident that the first 
estimate of the value of the sunken ship must be reconsidered. But 
besides these the fragments and the corroded marbles raise some important 
questions. 

A careful study of the marbles is not within the scope of this essay, but 
there is no doubt that they are of Graeco-Roman origin and secondary impor- 
tance. It is also clear from the extra supports left on the marble that the 
figures were meant for export. The natural conclusion is that the ship is 
nothing more nor less than a sunken merchantman. There must have been 
a great demand among the Romans for such statues; those here recovered 
are for the most part popular works not meant for the connoisseur, but within 
the reach of the average Roman. Such acargo would vary in quality, and it 
is only natural that the dealer should include in his collection a few works of 
special value. Such a work is the Hermes. Statues of this kind would have 
been plentiful enough in Greece, and would have been much prized abroad. 

The lead still clinging to the feet is no real argument against this view. 
The phrase ‘ wrenched from their pedestals,’ which is usually employed, does 
not represent the fact. The bases themselves were probably broken, and the 
operation must have been conducted with some care or the ankles would have 
been injured, which is not the case. 

Had they been figures carried off from a sack as trophies their condition 
would have been very different; while the useless encumbrance of pedestals 
would have been as unwelcome to the merchant as toaconqueror. Further- 
more, besides the adaptations we have noticed, there is at least one 
acknowledged copy: the Heracles. But, without considering the great 
masterpieces, there was a wealth of good Greek originals left in Greece till 
at least the time of Pausanias, which would have been at the mercy of a 
victorious general. Why should-he take copies? Such scruples were rarely 
shown even by provincial governors, while Sulla, of all men, would have done 


the exact opposite. 
R 2 


286 ‘THE STATUES FROM CERIGOTTO. 


I cannot help concluding that this is precisely the cargo. ἐξ a at, 
while it is precisely the collection that no conqueror would be 80 pant a 
to make. This conclusion, if correct, far from lessening our interest. ix 
the statues, should tend to raise our opinion of that long period from 200 B. 
to 300 A.D., which is too often treated with contempt, and should help us ee 
remember that it, too, has some claim on our admiration. 


KT jon ce ν᾿ 
»ΦὁὁΠὺΛΡὺ 


ῳ 


-ALEXANDRIAN HEXAMETER FRAGMENTS. 
[PLATE X.] 


In the winter of 1900 a number of Greek papyrus fragments came into 
my hands in Cairo, through one of the most trustworthy of the local dealers. 
Bt They had to be sorted out from a mass of miscellaneous fragments, with 
: which they had probably been found. The shop was rather dark, and the 
, pieces had not been cleaned; but the hand was clearly literary, and the few 
| words I made out in sorting them over, led me to think that they were, like 
| most literary papyri, Homeric. It was not until some months later, in 
Oxford, that a more leisurely inspection of them revealed their unusual 
character, and convinced me of their true importance, as the fragments, 
unfortunately meagre, of some Alexandrian hexameter poem, no longer 
extant. A further examination disclosed some curious features, chief among 
them a system of spelling that seems to mark these pieces as unique among 
published Greek papyri. 

The recto of the papyrus is covered with a series of late second century 
accounts in two, or possibly three, rapid cursive hands. The verso of this 
old account roll,—which seems to consist of little more than lists of names 
followed by amounts in arourae and artabae, and was perhaps a register of 

. land, with the amounts of produce chargeable upon it for rent or taxes,— 
was afterwards used for a hexameter poem. The question arises whether the 
papyrus of hexameters was not a copy made by someone for his own use, 

rather than a copy made for sale. Mr. Kenyon has been disposed to maintain 
that works written on the versos of old accounts were always personal copies, 

: not copies for sale. But Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt have pointed out that 
their fine copy of thirty columns of J/iad HZ, a manuscript very well written and 
apparently designed for sale, occupies the verso of the ‘ Petition of Dionysia 
to the Praefect’ (Oxyrhynchus Papyri, II, p. 96). The hexameters before us, 
however, have no such clainis to calligraphic excellence, and the space-saving 
devices occasionally resorted to, together with the extremely peculiar hand 
in which the whole is written, invite the suggestion that the copy was made 
by the person who proposed to possess it. 

_Of the eleven fragments,! the largest are B (45-5 x 16°2 cm.) containing 
Columns ITV. ; C (147 x 917 cm.) containing Columns VI.-VII. (of which 
a Je is given in Pl. X); and A (103x215 cm.) containing 
te! “S- yee yoo '= —— οἱ a - 


ἶ 


ὌΝ αὐ υκσ υ ὐνσ ὐνσνπμυσσ σι 


measure A 10°3 x21‘5em., @6°7x18cm. The papyrus is No. 101 in 
., C147 x21°7 em., D 36x {πὸ writer's collection. The fragments were 
EZ 9x16 cm., F 5°5x11'2 em., said to have come from Ashumén. 


ι᾿ 


238 EDGAR J. GOODSPEED 


Column I. The order of cursive hands on the recto suggests this placing of 
Column I., although other columns may have intervened between it and 
Column II. and between Columns IJV. and Column VI. The fragments 
designated IX., X., XI. seem certainly to belong after Column VIII, but in 
what order cannot be determined, and the little fragments XII. and XIIL., 
which I have been unable to fit in anywhere, are added by themselves, for 
the sake of completeness. 

The hand is a peculiar one. It is uncial, careful, and square, but 
inelegant. ἃ is in the late, almost cursive, form. X is hardly larger than 
other letters. P is short, not going below the line, while ® has a Jong 
vertical. But € is the distinctive letter of the hand, having the form €. 
The writing is in columns of twenty-six or twenty-seven lines. There are no 
accents, unless a possible acute on .. jepwrata, VI. 13, be admitted. 
Breathings, marks of quantity, scholia, and critical marks are lacking. The 
dative cadscript is not written. There are a few instances of punctuation, some 
lines being followed by a high, middle, or low point. Several short lines are 
followed by a crooked dash, to fill up the space and relieve the inequality at 
the right margin of the column. This recalls the curious dash used to fill 
out the lines in the Oxyrhynchus Λόγια, a papyrus belonging, like these 
hexameters, to the second or third century. 

The orthography of the fragments constitutes their most interesting 
feature. ἄνγελον for ἄγγελον, IX. 8, xapi& for χαρίζει, 111. 13, τουτον for 
τούτων, moira for dura, VI. 13, of course hardly require mention. A more 
striking feature is the doubling of « in such words as apnuos, III. 6, and 
ἱιερός, LV. 1, VI. 10. This doubling occurs, Prof. Blass kindly informs me, in 
Cyprian, Attic (ΤΗΙΙΟΙ), and Pamphylian (AAPIIQN A) inscriptions, but I 
am not aware of any other instances of such spellings in papyri. φίλοκξε, 
IV. 4, is paralleled in ἐκξουσίαν, Oxyrhynchus Papyri, II. p. 228, 1. 18, in a 
papyrus dated A.D. 23, and is moreover corrected from κέ to xo. The 
alternative semi-resolution of £ to Eo appears in baepeEcoy|[.]v, I. 25. 

In orthography the papyrus presents a further point of resemblance to 
the inscriptions. Before σθ, ou, om, στ, an additional o is inserted. 
Meisterhans in his Grammatik der attischen Inschriften has collected instances 
of σ doubled before « from Attic inscriptions of the classical and Macedonian 
periods, of the second century B.c., and of imperial times: ᾿Ασσκληπιός, 
Διοσσκουρίδης, Φρυνίσσκος. Again, o is doubled before y in an inscription 
of the fifth century B.c.: Αἰσσχύλος ; and very often before τ in inscriptions 
of the old Attic time, of the fifth, fourth, and third centuries, and of imperial 
times : ἐσστίν, χρησστή, ᾿Αρίσστων, Kacotwp, Νέσστωρ, εἰσς Τένεδον, εἰσς 
τήν, εἰσς τό (Meisterhans, op. cit., p. 69). Similar instances occur in in- 
scriptions from Ozolian Locris of the fifth century B.c. (Roberts, Introduction 
to Greek Epigraphy, Nos. 231, 232), and in Macedonian inscriptions from 
Pella, dated a.p. 46, cf. Burton, The Politarchs (Am. Jowr. Theology, 11. p. 611). 
Of instances of oor, the papyrus gives the following: περισστη I. 21, 
acot[epoevte] I. 23, Ἰισστοις 11, 4, ασστραππτουσα III. 1, γαμοσστολε III. 5, 
μυροβοσστρ.. εντος III. 9, ἀρισστεας VI. 12, πολυσσταφυλί VI. 25, 


ALEXANDRIAN HEXAMETER FRAGMENTS. 239 


αγνωσστοῖ VI. 26. Of instances of σσθ, we find πολυσσθενεωπα II. 11; of 
con, συσσπορα VI. 2; of cop, κοσσμον IV.9; of κκτ, νυκκτί VIL. 4; of ππτ, 
tmmrarat III. 10. Μοκχθοις IV.11, ere κχθονι VI. 16, μοκχθουσα XI. 7, and 
οπφθαλμοισῖίι IX. 3, and οπφθαλμοισιν X. 5, are analogous spellings. Mid- 
way between this insertion of the smooth mute before the smooth, and the 
smooth mute before the rough, falls τετακγμένοι X. 6, in which the smooth 
is inserted before the middle palatal. As a whole, this series of spellings 
has, to my knowledge, no parallel among papyri, or other Greek manuscripts, 
and constitutes the distinctive feature of these fragments. Prof. Blass has 
suggested that this system of spelling may have been the work of a gram- 
marian of the Alexandrian period or later. 

Of the poem to which these hexameters belong, the fragments un- 
fortunately preserve few complete lines and no complete sentence. The 
halting metre of some verses suggests a late date for the work, and the 
vocabulary occasionally recalls expressions in Theocritus and the anthologies. 
The poem was doubtless a work of the Alexandrian school, perhaps of the 
second century B.C., the reference to the Ptolemaean Arsinoe, I. 5, suggesting 
the terminus a quo. Professor Blass, who has kindly looked over a copy of 
the fragments, has pointed out to me that the laws of versification introduced 
by Nonnus are not reflected in it, and it is thus earlier than that poet, at any 
rate. Nonnus did not permit a hexameter to end in a proparoxytone, while 
our poet does not scruple to end his verses with ὄλυμπον and ἄνακτος. But 
the palaeography of the fragments will of itself carry the work back to a 
time some two centuries before Nonnus. Of the nature of the poem it is 
more difficult to judge. Several expressions, ¢.g., the ‘winged loves,’ and the 
address to Aphrodite as γαμοστόλος, suggest an Epithalamium. Professor 
G. J. Laing, of the University of Chicago, has proposed the view that it is 
an Epyllion or development of a single heroic episode, without action,—a 
favourite form of composition’‘among the Alexandrians. Again, the fragments 
may belong to a proper Epic poem of the Alexandrian time; but until some 
further fragments are recovered, it seems impossible to decide between these 


views. 


CoLumn I. (Fragment A.) 


cvvdap[.] . ¢ σεμνα. [. .] . λαις καπαΐ 


. +. Mois... . petaro[.]. . χήσομ.. . 
yaupeT..... TMT . . ταμακί 
συνχθ. wk... μεροπεσσι καὶ αθαϊνατοισι θεοισι 
5 apowoa TTONE MALOU γυναι ὄν νος, ὃν (δὰ αιγενες! 
ἡνμαναρεσπ' .0β... []. . πανδί 
δον που νον τ γε... χαωστε. ἐξ 
a a etwas pada δα. [ 
διῶ. ara ae rk δος. ἃ rast βροτί[οισιΐ 
-- . 
i 
By 4. “ν᾿ 


ee 


Seer gee ν᾿ Js, ; 


5 τ- 7 ΠΕ ἘΣ es 


10 mpwrov μὲν yap exov προς cel 


ἐμ... σ΄. evas nov To πί 


Bie Povo Peas ci. Ar . κηΐ 
δυ ele [Ju mpo.0o.x.0.0.[ 
gw... [...]. mpotaca xpatoveac| 
15. [1 i SB -) areps yore xadots Tel x 
J]... {- αἸαφιπολὼων σὺν κλεῖ — - 


.]δὲ. . [. αἸθανατων προκαθηγ[τὴρ 

a]u<a>dumo[ro]es σκοπελοισὶν ομου τί 
ot) αναφ[υλ)]ασσουσιν πτόλιν Wow 

20 . «Πρμαχί. .Jev πρωτα πατὴρ ανδίρων τε θεων τε 
Ἵπειχί. .1. φαες να περισστη.. [1. [10 5 
JeeO[. .1 wo. [Jy - - ς [7ὑν καλλ[.]πυροί 
Rin ke A ge .| . . oupave ἀσστεζροεντι 
ΟΝ pe 1 κρονειονος πα. τ. .ο. 

Dyadic, 58s, Wee et Sin at BY Ρ Ju υὑπερεξσοχ[.]ν ate . [ 
oe ee ae ke ea oe a KOAT@ ana Karw . a ἡ 

(End of column.) | 


5 ᾿Αρσινόα; cf. Theocritus 15: 111. The daughter of Ptolemy I. and 
sister and wife of Philadelphus is probably meant. 


(Fragment J.) 


The following fragment shews the same hand on the recto as that of the 
recto of Column 1., and may possibly belong to it; but I have been unable "ἥ 


to fit them together. 
. ᾿ς λων υμεναίων 


Ἰθιασειαις 
αἸνδρασι τερπνοῖς 
Ἰαοιδὴ 
5 Ἰαρισστοις 
τυ ae ear... ὦ ἶ 
edo dol, τι aa 
1. πεέλοιο peyf a . 
: oe 
. ; joe πλευροιῖς i ΠΥ: 
10 : ; - jos Ἡμετερὴ Σ od oe σ᾽. 


.» : i Jen χοισῖ ΕἾ ᾿ς 
- ᾿ 7 tts ‘ { [Ὁ 3. “ Me » »ἡ 


δ’, 
¥. 
7 0t0- — Ψ “-»" 


ae ᾿ Je > 
rae 


eS ee ee ee ee oe π]ολυσσθενεωπα. 


πε TOR τ τα διὸ ρα εὐ τ ee ey διάδος Js τυπον ἢ γεγαωσα 

ΦΈΣΙ Huta a ke . 1... .Jus χθονὸς nde ποληων 
; Rites ots hale seus τὸν διὸ ee Web eGo |s ποντον οπαζεις 
τα Pade τ Abie ae Pee nt; 5 He oe ee οἸπλιζη 
PNR el eliea ge Ap Ps ὁ ἀξ κα ἐγὼν ed ἄχος Be te ees 7. ἐσωΐ 
SP ΝΑ ΘΟ Sty tp aa cae eae fee Jel 
| (Probably nine lines missing.) 
| 

~~ Cotumn III. 

; εὐ ΕΥ̓ as 1 a, ] acor[plarmrovea yeda τ[ερπνοισι προσώποις 
1 es τῆνος ] θαλασσοπορον χαροπε ὃ απο] ποντου 
Pee es, owe. ἘΠ Beds Ep abavatwy τε 
το, ς es sue Sate vat 7... avadpov .— 

5 @ [καλὴ adp |oyevera spt eo kat χαρι τερπνὴ 
τον a Ja τυπον γλυκεραις τε apnua ὃ εστιν 
a Ύ ΡΣ προς δον ἀδάρ. ¥ θαλεροι πηδωσι ερωτες — 


ε͵νεων μαζὼν δροσεραι 0 aya δυαι 


Bae cg εἰ ae ξανθοιο Koun[v] μυροβοσστρ . . εντος 
Sia χροα ἱππταται ae 

ts ape Kad@v υμεναιων-- 
‘magoacw ἀνδρι ποθητὴν 

. oo... λον σὺ api 


242 EDGAR J. GOODSPEED 


ως] μεν χαρειτων τείμαν σε φυσις νενομίσται 


1ὅ σεμνοτίατη. .. .]εἰ τον cov συνομευνον ἀνᾶσσα 
ΟΠ Cone ΤΡῚΣ Ὁ 7. τοῖσι φίλον καὶ συμμαχον οντὰ 
..7. τονταμ. [. . . «τοσαιθῖ 


Traces of four lines. 
(Probably five others missing.) 


5 For the completion of this line I am indebted to Prof. Blass. On 
γαμοστόλος, an epithet of Hera and Aphrodite, ef Anthol. Pal. 6: 207. 

9 μυροβοστρύχου ἐντός can not be read. (μυροβοστρύχου, of. Anthol. 
Pal.5: 147. 5). 

1ὅ On συνόμευνος cf. O.1.G. iii. p. 265, No. 4622, 1. 4, a line in which 
σεμνότατος also occurs: σεμνοτάτη συνόμευνε, καλῶν ὑπόδειγμα φιλάνδρων. 
The inscription is a Palestinian epitaph. 


CoLumyn. IV. 
τους μἱερους τη] 


apna ἀναγων ὃ. . [ 
ἠέλιος φαεθων [...].. [ 


o (corr.) 


ω φιλοκξε To με. [. .]ον 
5 aalc| yap μυθοισι πὰ. ν[.. .)].. [ 
πτηνους ες παντας ἘΠ ὃς μὴ φαινομενους.. [. .]. 
TOUS μεροπων per αλλων tal. . .|ToLs φρενα καρτεροϊεσον 
μυθον μεν cary παρελώμεθα ser ὃ ερωτες 
σεμνως οἱ κατα δον ἀν ἐπ ἀνδρασι dwpa φεροντες 


10 πρωτα μεν nedtos μετεπείτα τε [δ]ια σεληνη--- 


μοκχθοιῖς pal...... 7. AL .7.. ... ἀνα[φ]εροντες 

δ}. 41 .. τ ef. το: πὶ μῶν PRO ἢ, αὐ τ ἌΣ .]ολείψαι 

ὙΠ ΤΟΣ ΣΟΥ Ἴ ΩΓ. soe aysaee: -... 9] ἀδικαίως 

Ohne one gee lo ] [ee Syn gh at a he ars See 1. ες nme 
15.) ει τον x Roe ha Be ee a το ee ja θνητοις 

ΝΥ ὑαιυχυυϊνυρεβυν ὑφλνι τον, ] : enyar— 

τ νι τιον οι ih a jovo— 


Traces of two lines. 
(Probably seven lines wanting.) 
1 Apparent traces of χλε are discernible just to the left of the line. 
6 ἔρωτες πτηνοί, ‘winged loves, recalls the language of Theocritus 


(7: 117) and Catullus, as well as Apollonius Rhodius, and Simonides, in all 
of whom the plural of épws (cupido) occurs—a usage unknown to Homer. 


Le” ἊΝ" - 


πί τ. καρμη. [ τον τρισ. 


(Probably seven lines wanting.) 
CoLtumn VI. (Fragment C.) | 


SA ee eer a ae ] πολὺν nepa και χθονα δειαν--- 
Χο ν ee ] Kat συσσπορα τερπνα τα γαιὴς 
Seas One ne Ss KY 2 δ Jap opov χλοεροις σπορι. cow 
"ΡΥ ΣΎ ] δροσερων ἀνεμοιο λαβοντα 
δένει ζοςς ἐνν Ὡρως Je καιροισι διοισι δοθεντων 
ΒΥ Σ DS ere 7 μεγαν ουρανον ολβιοτα fev 
πο Oh: ya ig TR δ Jo ᾿κρονειονος ανκυλομητου 
. Creat cee oe ee ἐν] οὖς eo δὲ τ exo προς ὀλυμπον 
he Oa eer eee ] . @ KepavoBiny γονον ὠκὺυν 
ΠΥ Gua. eS ρα fads Ἰραν wepas χθονος ἡμετερησιν 


"ONO ee ρὰ J... . δ erepov nyepovna 
MR Nc ie cu chce 6 ws ] kat apiooteas ns παλαμησιν 
>. eae 7. . epwtata φοῖίλα γυγαντ[ω)ν 
BN eMedia a Se x 5 7. v yevos aypiov ανδρων--- 
δου 232. ].. [ .] καὶ adov κατα 'κυμα θαλαττῆς 


ΠΣ 4 Mey, oot δὸ [. . . τὸν ems κχθονιὶ Kata ποντον 
Poke ws eens -Jace[.) . ε [0.0] τὸν εκγαίων βρια[ρ]εφοντης 
Ap ee ΓΝ ‘en ἦν. . εἸκατηβέλεταο avaKxtos 
SO Aa τς,» οὐ 7. ηυκομος Texe ANT@— 

AP ES Shee ] κορυφαις λασιωτιδος VANS 
OSS sitet Ce ~ 
_ Scr [.] . v[Juou . προ. . Tov 

aha HS Ε--- ΜΑΣ Pt lgeor{-]Pe{.] [1. μων 


z= = νὰ 
ues ’ 
ae af ey me 

» αὶ bs ae 

ἦ 7 ΕΣ 


τοὶ _— ye 


τῆν πότ at 


PER ΡΥ Ἰωντο ον esp aly Es 2 oot Ύι ᾿ 
ποτ eee ΠῚ .. +). ἐπ ayvooorof,] emidouBau- Ss Tig E ae 
ako tah Sle eens Ἰμαλετικον o ὃ «κάλουν Te ὡ 
(End of column.) : 
6 ὄλβιστε has been suggested, but the papyrus seems to read 0 λβιο 7 
apparently a vocative like μητίετα. “----.. 


10 Or perhaps ἡμιπερησιν. 
18 The traces of letters will not justify φ]ρβερώτατα. The phe 
recalls the ἄγρια φῦλα Γιγάντων of Odyssey ἡ 206. 
16 Perhaps καὶ has been omitted before κατα. 
18 .The phrase is familiar from Jliad A 75. It occurs also in The — 
Shield of Heracles, 100. The epithet occurs in the Hymn to Apollo, 157. 
20 λασιωτίς, though quite intelligible, seems to be a new word. : 
26 ἐπιλοίβη, of. Orph. Arg. 603. ‘a 


CoLUMN VII. : 


τον καὶ 
ο δε καὶ 
προσ pl 
νυκκτὶ 
5 avdpal ἽΝ 
arr . [ | : 
πρωτί δῆ 
σεμν 
εν. ax[ 
105 ees Tt 
up . a 
τοις κί .-τὉὦ 
ω πασί . ; 
Xpva[ 
15 βαχχί 
καὶ πί 
παντί 


opie 
σεμνΐ ᾿ ᾿ ‘ 
30 πληκί % . ΤΙ 
κολπί 
ξανθῖ 
evpo| 
ηδυν ty 
25 ew del ἊΣ te 
καὶ ἀκ a οὐ ΟΡ 


y= 
_-A° =f ὦ 
a τὸν ἃ. 


ef = 


Traces of five lines. 
(Probably nine lines wanting.) 


Cotumn IX. (Fragment E£.) 
(Probably two lines wanting.) 
Traces of two lines. 
ὧν ὃ εν οπφ[θ])α[λΊμοισίι 
okwy εἐπερχομενὼν a τ [ 
5 θηπτο pay ες μεγα κυμα. [ 
καλὴν Te ἀανδρομεδαν ενΐ 
Onpa Se καὶ βυθιον στυγερουΐ 
avyedov ovxt Karns βουλίης 
ανἼδρεσσιν o δὴ κατ enn en . [ 
10 του]ς μὲν yap φευγοντας [ 
εἾντος ὃ 0 καματαος υἱ 
τῇην δὲ εἰδὴ κε οεσσι βροχί 
αἤλκυονις χήρα παρα κυμί 
τ]ων κα[νων μυθων ε. [ 
15 αν]τιλάλων yeverov δῇ 
᾿εκἴγδοτον αν[δ]ρομεδαν | 
PA EES ἀφοῦ δι Ἢ 
.εἽνοσί. Ἰουτα.. ς τον 
Le Joul 
. ἀν ne ise : ch Jexl 
5 =e . 4 3 οἵ four lines. 


STE 


EDGAR J, GOODSP 


% 
ofa ω 
osm » 


CoLumn X. (Fragment Ff) 
(Probably eleven lines wanting.) 


τ Στὰ Rowe ροῦν τς ρει Co πο, Ge Ἰνηχους 
OT Ne OE TS ER ee See 1... aetov[.Jv αγνὴν ν 
ge Roe ἀπ eae , wal .] . apa την τρίσι μορίφαις Ὁ ΒΝ 
πον a α esse es ἴον ἀγχάαν κουραν' , 
δ ΑΣΑ Στ" Ἰεσιν ὀπφθαλμοισιν 
Be A Pie tat δὲ ροβοβ ας δ al hd τα τον δε oh ie τ τ]ετάκγμενοι μυσιται ee 
Se ae eee ey ee eres τς Ἰσοῴον κικλησκουσιν. ι 
adele ancestry eran on aid ΤΟΣ .|oxopovta προφατηΐν 7 
ΕΝ ΤΣ ee, ye ee ον ὁ αθα]νατοισιν em . θλοι a 
BO oe aia gee eet sh nica χροὶ Se * Jpenow— ; 
ἘΣ ΡΣ ] ἐλασσφορον a.. a 
τ ιν σιν ee Ἰπαρεχεις φαος [n]duv 
στ τε 2, ἘΠῚ ἡΠαντικεπαιαν--- 
Ἔα ee ae ee ΠΣ τὰ ΤΣ Ἰακλονωΐ. νον. € \ 
_ Traces of one line. 
(End of column.) ξ 
3. Οὐ μορίεαις. 
CoLumn XI. (Fragment G.) 
(Probably three lines wanting.) | 

Inoxe . [. ’ 

] . σεφυσ . [ 

Jadexa Ἢ [ 

] . coo βυΐ. 1.1]. ds... ΠΤ 

5 Ἰνλῆρο..-[ si ce ed | . 


Ἰυρεου mwerad ... . avdpal 
Ἰμοκχθουσα τε μὴ. .ητ. 


a . Joup .... . ν ἀπομυῖ 


1 ρος [. . .Jovo φιλο. [ 
(End of column.) 


CoLtumN XII. (Fragment ΗΠ) 


(Some lines probably wanting.) 
Ἰχον . [Jas 
|reBe .. Ava 
Je φαρετρας 


Jas οἰσστους 


5 Je er avtw— 
Traces of three lines. 
(Others probably wanting.) 


Cotumn XIII. (Fragment J.) 


(Some lines probably wanting.) 
7γον ὃ 
᾿ Ἰνεαποῖ 
ον 1. ρμακυμῖ 
Jr αιγιδὰς[ 
‘Por ee) (Some lines probably wanting.) 
δ ae Epa@ar J. GoopsPeen. 


Sie 5! 
ὡνς «9 ἃ 
a, mt i Pod Ἂν 
ὰ οἷς 4 a 
πεν «{..:. 
[ὦ ᾿ δ ὦ = ;t 
* . 5 


’ 7 


=. 
4 5? 
aly 


POTTERY FROM ΖΑΚΒΟ. 


In the excavations made by Mr. Hogarth in 1902 at Zakro on the 
east coast of Crete a very large quantity of pottery was found. The article © 
in B.S.A. vol. vii., describing the excavation in general, contains a first report 
on this pottery, and more recently three vases have been published by Mr. 
Hogarth in J.H.8. xxii. p. 333. The task of making a fuller report 
was undertaken by Mr. J. H. Marshall, but he was unable to complete it, 
The preliminary sorting which he had done I found was of the greatest use 
to me when I began work on the pottery. I have also had the advantage 
of Mr. Hogarth’s advice and correction in preparing this paper, for which I 
wish to express my thanks. 

A reference to Mr. Hogarth’s ane report in B.S.A. vii. p. 121, will 
shew that the pottery came from several distinct sources. There were 
(1) the pits, which were found full of sherds, entirely unstratified, (2) a 
group of houses on the lower spur, described as Houses A, B, C, ete. 
Besides these an early cave burial afforded some specimens of grey-faced 
incised ware, and two geometric tombs were opened. 

It will be convenient to describe first the pottery found in the pits. No. 
distinction is made between the yields of the two pits. The remains shewed 
no traces of stratification; Kamares and Mycenaean vases were found 
together. I begin with an account of the Kamares ware found. 


POTTERY FOUND IN THE PIrts. 
A.—Kamares Ware. 


The general characteristics of this find of Kamares pottery are these. 
Only a few shapes are represented, nearly all of them small, and of these 
shapes one, the straight-sided cup described below, outnumbers all the rest 
put together. 

The glaze is generally of a deep purple-black covering the whole surface 
of the fine red clay. In some cases however this black paint is very thin, 
and applied only partially, so that the red of the clay shews through. In yet 
other cases the glaze is light red or pink. These different varieties of glaze 
are found on vases of the same form. The following types occur : 

1. Cups of the shape οἵ the Vaphio gold cups (Fig. 1). These are very 
numerous. Reminiscences of metal technique are seen in the flat bottom 


POTTERY FROM ZAKRO. 249 


joining the straight sides at a sharp angle, which is marked by a thickening 
in the clay as for a join between two metal plates, and in the flat strap- 
shaped handle. The bottoms of these cups shew the marks of the string used 
to separate the cup from the clay left on the wheel. These markings appear 
throughout all the Zakro pottery where vases stand on flat bases and not on 
a raised ring. They are illustrated by Fig. 2. 

The decoration is generally of the tendril pattern shewn in Fig. 1, 
a pattern specially characteristic of the Zakro pottery, but beside this 


Fic. 1. Fic. 2. Fie. 8. 


spirals, festoons, and a pattern of wavy parallel lines are found. Some few 
cups shew as pattern two big splashes of white paint, one on each side of 
the cup. 

2. Next in order of frequency are small bowls. These range as far as 
can be seen in their imperfect state from 5°5 to 7°5 cms. in height and from 
85 to 12 cms. in diameter. Fig. 3 shews a typical example. The lip of 
the bowl is turned outwards, its bottom is flat. The handle is flat and strap- 
like, as in the straightsided cups described above. As with them the entire 
vase is covered inside and out with black glaze, and the decoration usually 
consists of the characteristic tendril pattern, which is finished off at the 
handle by having two tendrils joined by three cross bands, a device which 
makes the. end of the tendrilled branch look like a lily. The upper outside 
part of the handle bears stripes of white paint, and there are bands (generally 
two) of the same above and below the tendril pattern on the body of the 
bowl. 

3. Four bowls, whose bottoms only are preserved, shew incised lines 
drawn round the bowl and picked out with white paint. 

4. A group of small vases of the same fine red clay with more or less. 
thin black glaze. 

Their shapes are shewn by Figs. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. 

5. The ‘hole-mouth’ vase shewn in Fig: 12. The clay is covered with 
thin poor glaze, allowing the red of the clay to shew through. The clay 
knob on the rim diametrically opposite to the spout is perhaps a remini-- 
scence of a suspension hole. 

6. A few fragments of large Kamares vases. The clay is coarser than. 
in the smaller pieces hitherto described, but covered with the same black 


paint, though generally less lustrous, on which the design is painted: in 
H.S.— VOL. XXIII. 5 


250 R. M. DAWKINS 


white. The fragments are mostly mouths of large vases, Schnabelkannen and 
‘hole-mouth’ jugs. One amphora-mouth is preserved of the type whose 
two handles are high up on the shoulder and compress the mouth of the 
vase into two spouts. 

7. A few sherds shewing the geometrical patterns characteristic of 
earlier Kamares pottery. A further negative point about this pottery from 
the Pits is the entire absence of any Kamares ware with moulded decoration, 
though one such piece comes from house K (see Fig. 37 and description below). 

8. The broken vase shewn in Fig. 138. There is another handle of 
such a vase, and a complete specimen has been found at Psychro. The vase 


Fic. 8. Fic. 9. Fic. 10. 


Fic. 11. Fic. 12. Fic. 18. 


is apparently of Kamares technique. The clay is left uncovered except 
round the rim where there is a wash of reddish-brown hardly lustrous paint. 
On this are painted rough loop-shaped festoons in white, a characteristically 
Kamares scheme of decoration. The position of the handle inside instead 
of outside the body of the vase is very remarkable. The edge of the vase is 
notched at intervals, the clay at each notch being pinched up into a small 
lump. I can offer no suggestion as to the use of these vessels. 

9. A fragment of a bowl partially covered with black paint, and made 
of very fine red clay. It is decorated with a spray in white paint. The 
spray is somewhat conventionalized, and bears pairs. of lanceolate leaves, and 


POTTERY FROM ZAKRO. 251 


between these spikes of small flowers. The design is not in the usual 
Kamares style, and the fragment stands by itself in this respect. The 
plant represented is almost certainly the olive in flower. 

Of the Kamares ware in general it may be said that only a very small 
number of forms were found and those not common elsewhere. Among the 
Kamares pottery found at Palaikastro last year there is only one of the 
straightsided cups so common here. One bowl from Palaikastro shews a 
careless modification of the Zakro tendril pattern. Hardly any polychrome 
work was found; the patterns are executed in simple white upon the 
black ground. The only exception to this is formed by two or three sherds 
shewing red paint. 


B.—Mycenacan Ware. 


This ware has been described generally in the first report in B.S.A., vol. 
vii. Below will be found a detailed list of the principal types found. 
Amongst a very great number of fragments there were many entire vases. 
The bulk of them are of the finest Mycenaean technique, with fine slip and 
lustrous paint. 

1. A large number of bowls, mostly in fragments. These bowls have 
one handle, which is flat and strapshaped. It is put on in the same way 
as the handle of the Vaphio-type cups described above, and resembles these 
except that where the handle joins the rim of the bowl a small boss of clay 
is set in the angle. This boss probably represents the rivet that would be 
used to fasten the handle in a metal bowl. The rims of these bowls are 
quite plain and vertical; the bottoms are flat. As far as the fragments 
permit of measurement these bowls would seem to be some 11 to 14 cms. 
in diameter and 6°5 to 9 high. 

As regards decoration tlrey fall into two classes. 

(a) The inside of the bowl is covered with a coat of black paint, and the 
design reserved for the outside. This bears several concentric bands of paint 


Fic. 14. 


below, and one round the rim. Between these on the upper part of the 
bowl is a band of pattern, This is almost always the tendril pattern so 
common at Zakro, ; 


s2 


252 πος ἢ M. DAWKINS 


(ὁ) The outside of the bowl is decorated as in class (a). The inside of 
the bowl also bears a design, Above a series of concentric rings there is a 
band of floral design, These patterns are not numerous, and are in general 
a good deal stylized. Blank spaces between branches of various fixed forms 
are filled in with rows of half-moon-shaped strokes, Fig. 14 is a develop- 
ment of the inside of one of these bowls which can be restored, and shews 
the more usual motives employed. 

2, Fig. 15 represents a type which occurs also in a few fragments. It 
is a flattish bowl furnished with two hori- 
zontal handles and painted with floral 
patterns inside and outside. 

3. Fragments of a number of dishes 
and basins. These generally have a large 
flat bottom to stand. upon and no rim, 
Besides floral patterns, a characteristic 
element in their decoration is a running 
pattern consisting of a series of parallel 
wavy strokes of paint at right angles to the 
direction of the pattern. The paint at the 
edges of these strokes is shaded off a little, 
so that an effect is produced not unlike the grain of wood. The derivation 
of this pattern from the ‘waving’ made by indentation in the neolithic ware 
of Crete has been well demonecrated by Mr. Mackenzie in treating of the 
Knossos pottery in the present volume of this Journal. 

Under these three heads falls by far the greater quantity of Mycenaean 
ware from the pits. There remain to be mentioned a number of more or 
less solitary vases, remarkable for their form or decoration. Three of these 
have already been published in colours by Mr. Hogarth in the article in the 
J.H.S, already referred to. 

Of these three those numbered 1 and 2 in the plate have been fully 
dealt with in this article. To put them in connexion with the rest of the 
pottery it only remains to point out the similarity in shape and purpose 
between the first vase and the strainer shewn in Fig. 20, This resemblance 
extends to the form of the handles and the external rim round the waist of 
the vase. The singularity of the arrangement of the decoration on the 
strainer figured by Mr. Hogarth consists in the presence of the band of 
white flowers round the body of the vase below the handles, the normal 
arrangement being that the main decoration is set higher up on the shoulder 
of the vase and between the handles. This scheme is exemplified in Fig. 20, 
and on different types of vases in Figs. 23 and 18. 

The decoration of the vase numbered 3 in the J.H.S. article calls for some 
further notice as it has not been there dealt with at any length, and it will 
therefore be mentioned below, 

_ The more important of the remaining vases are :— 

(1) The vase shewn in Fig. 16. Fine clay, pale buff slip, and black paint. 

The shape of this vase is exactly paralleled by one found at Palaikastro. 


3a) 


——————— 


rT 


POTTERY FROM ZAKRO. 253 


Its most remarkable feature is the internal funnel, which runs from the 
shoulder to nearly the bottom of the vase. The bottom is perforated 
by a single hole, and there is also a hole pierced through the shoulder. 

(2) A handleless vase with a perforated bottom (Fig. 17). The leaf- 
pattern is executed in black paint on a pale slip with a very free hand, so 
that the stems of the grass-like plant stray beyond their proper limits. This 
type of vase usually has a flat vertical handle springing from the neck, and 
has been found also at Palaikastro and Knossos. 

(3) The Schnabelkanne shewn in Fig. 18. The body of this vase is 
covered with a fine pinkish slip; on this is laid black paint, covering the neck, 


Fie. 16. Fic. 17. Fig, 18. 


handle, and base, and forming the three-lobed whorls of the pattern. These 
whorls are picked out with lines and dots of white. 

With the decoration on this vase should be compared that on the third 
of the vases figured in the article in the J.H.S. above referred to. The shapes 
of the vases are quite different but the decoration contains several common 
elements. The most important of these is the three-leaved whorl, in this 
vase filled with bands and spots of white, in the other decorated with a lily. 
In both cases the leaves of the whorl are relieved with white paint. This 
whorl is characteristically Mycenaean. The whorl is not however always 
three-leaved ; as often as not it has four leaves. In this form it has been 
found on a large pithos at Palaikastro, again with the leaves relieved 
with white paint. The other common- element is the arched wavy line 
that in the vase shewn in Fig. 18 ornaments the leaves of the whorl, and 
in the vase shewn in the J.H.S. appears in bands of three or four, forming 
the top halves of leaves between and below the whorls. 

The lily on this vase is the same as that on the vase from Thera figured 
in Rayet and Collignon, ‘ Histoire de la Céramique Grecque,’ Fig. 12. It 
also occurs on a Kamares cup found at Knossos, and published in JH.S. xxi. 
Pl. vi. Ὁ. 


254 R. M. DAWKINS 


This flower is probably the natural original of the conventional ornament 

so common on Mycenaean vases, a form of which is shewn in Fig. 18a. The 

stalk remains the same; the two side petals are represented 

by the two volutes. The third petal of the flower is diagram- 

matically represented by the central lobe of the pattern, whose 

pointed end, formed by the lines of the volutes, gives the general 

shape assumed by the mass of stamens and the pistil. It may be 

Fic. 18a, that this point is due in part to the pattern being as much a 

stylized iris as a lily, in which case the point will represent the 

standard petals and the volutes and central lobe the drooping petals of the 

flower. The pattern occurs in various forms, some so stylized as to have 

lost the stalk altogether, whilst others have it growing out of the wrong 
end. 

The importance of this vase shewn in Fig. 18 is that its decoration forms 
a link between the Kamares and the Mycenaean styles. The buff slip and 
pattern in black are Mycenaean; the black leaves them- 
selves with their pattern in white are Kamares. The con- 
nexion between the two is thus more striking when we 
recognize in the pattern on the leaves of the whorl a pattern 
that occasionally occurs on the straight-sided Kamares cups Fic. 19. 
found in the pits. For some of the fragments of these have 
a pattern consisting of a space filled with dots and bounded, as on these 
leaves, with’ a wavy line on one side and with a straight one on the other. 
Fig. 19 represents one of these fragments. 

A fragment from the pit also illustrates this point. Half of it is covered 
with a buff slip; the other half by black paint on which is a festoon pattern 
in white which occurs on some of the straight-sided Kamares cups. Asso- 
ciated with this festoon are half-moon shaped strokes in rows, a pattern 
noticed above as characteristic of the Mycenaean bowls found in the 
pits. 

Two objects found are of importance from the religious point of view. 
One is a small cup of unpainted clay bearing on it in relief a crescent and 
disk, the disk being immediately above and inside the crescent. The other 
is a fragment of smooth-faced unpainted pottery with the same device in 
moulded work, except that the crescent bears incised marks making it look 
like a cable. This device of a disk above a crescent or pair of horns is 
paralleled by objects found at Gournia. 


PoTTERY FROM THE HOUSEs. 


The greater part of the pottery found in the group of houses discovered 
on the lower spur at Kato Zakro comes from the two houses named respec- 
tively A and I. Its generally late Mycenaean character has been described 
by Mr. Hogarth in his first report, and it only remains here to. describe the 
more important types represented. : 


POTTERY FROM ZAKRO. 255 


A.—Painted Mycenaean Ware, 


1. Both these houses yielded several strainers of the shape shewn in 
Fig. 20, some complete and more in fragments. They are made of a fine 
clay covered with a shining buff slip. The decoration of this example con- 
sists of stripes below and a band of pattern round the shoulder of the vase, 


Fic. 20. Fic. 21. Fie. 22, 


‘executed in bright buff or orange paint. The pattern is as usual picked out 
with white paint and in this case consists of a row of axe-blades (Fig. 21). 
It is to be compared with the double-axe pattern shewn in Fig. 24. The 
shape of the horizontal handles which consist of a flat strip of clay is 


Fic. 23. Fic. 25. 


characteristic. Midway between the two handles there are little raised 
bosses. These vases are usually-about 16 cms. high. 

_ Similar strainers occur at Palaikastro and at Gournia, but are often 
much smaller. 


256 R. M. DAWKINS 


2. Of exactly similar technique is the vase from House A shewn in 
Fig. 22. Three more vases at least of this shape were found in fragments. 

3. The same technique is shewn by the vase from House A represented 
by Fig. 23. The bottom of this vase is perforated. Its pattern is remark- 
able. Round its shoulder runs a row of double-axes, painted in reddish- 
orange paint on the buff ground and picked out, as is shewn in Fig. 24, by 
dots of white. But the double-axe is so far conventionalised as to be treated 
as a sort of plant, for we see leaves growing from its handle,! whilst it is 
surmounted by a sort of volute. The festoons with which the lip is decorated 
inside recall a common scheme of Kamares ornament. 

4. A fragment of a strainer from House A of the same shape as that 
shewn in Fig. 25, which comes from a house near the pits, and of the same 
technique as the vases described above. 

This pattern of strainer has also been found at Palaikastro. 


ele eta Se -- 
Fig. 26. Fic. 27. Fic. 28. 


5. From House I come the remains of a double vase shewn in Fig. 26. 
The clay is greyish-green, and there are traces of dull black paint. Exactly 
similar vases have been found at Gournia. One of the pair of vases has its 
mouth stopped up, the other has a spout and a strainer in its neck. The two 
tops are joined by an arch-shaped handle, which is broken away in this 
instance, but may be safely restored by comparison with the Gournia 
examples. 

6. Some fragments from House A represent a vase that in pattern 
resembled the vase from the pit shewn in Fig. 18. The pattern is the 
peculiar three-leaved whorl in black paint, picked out with white, on a ground 
of buff slip. 

7. From House I come two cylindrical vases with narrowed mouths, one 
of which is shewn in Fig. 27. It has flat horizontal handles like the strainers 
mentioned above, and rests on three feet. The other example is covered 
with a pale buff slip ornamented with a fine freely drawn pattern of crocuses. 
‘The clay of both is extremely rotten through bad baking. 


1 As in a recently found Knossian treatment of the axe. 


POTTERY FROM ZAKRO. 257 


8. Both House A and House I yielded spouts of ‘ hole-mouth’ vases and 
mouths of Schnabelkannen of Mycenaean style. Some of these were de- 
corated with black and red paint, sometimes with white added. The upper 
part of a Schnabelkanne thus painted had a raised rim round the neck and 
three clay knobs on the spout, one on each side and one beneath the lip. 

From House G comes the hole-mouthed vase shewn in Fig. 28. 

9. From House I came the small jug shewn in Fig. 29. It has yellowish 
slip, and is decorated with concentric bands of paint roughly laid on, and 
above them a band of tendril pattern a little different 
from the form usually found at Zakro. In this form 
the tendril pattern is found also at Palaikastro, and 
a precisely similar jug (a little larger) comes from 
Gournia. 

10, Fig. 30 shews a large Schnabelkanne ornamented 
with a pattern of spirals round the upper part of the 
body and having a raised rim round the neck. It is 
exactly like a vase from Knossos. 

11. Modifications of the Biigelkanne are shewn by 
the small vases in Figs. 31 (House I) and 32 (House A). An example was 
also found in which the handle was reduced to a mere boss. The relation of 


Fic. 31. 


Fic. 30. Fic. 32. 


these fini to the Biigelkanne on the one hand and on the other to the type 


_ of vase with a side spout and open mouth crossed by an arch-shaped handle 


that is so common amongst early geometric vases in Crete, as at Kourtes, 
is not clear, 


258 R. M. DAWKINS 


B.— Unpainted Ware. 


A great deal of unpainted pottery was found in the houses. This was 
made of a coarser red clay, and was clearly the ordinary domestic pottery of 
the place. The main types were the following. 

1. Funnel-shaped kalathos-like vases like those found at Palaikastro. 
One of the two found was furnished with two handles inside, crossing one 
another at right angles. . 

2. Akin to these were the two vases, one of which is shewn in Fig. 33. 
Their use must have been the same as that of the kalathi, from which they 
differ in having not so spreading a mouth but an external handle. 

3. Fig. 34 shews one of a class of vessel very common on such sites as 
Zakro and Palaikastro. The fact that the box part of these vessels often shews 
marks of burning proves that their use was in some way connected with fire. 


Fig. 33. 


Fic. 84. Fie. 35. 


4. From House I came the enigmatic vessel figured in B.S.A. vii. p. 141 
and Fig. 35. The bottom of another was also preserved. The burnt state of 
this latter and the fact that the holes at the sharp end of the complete 
example are the same as those in the vessels mentioned just above, 7.¢. one 
big hole amongst a number of smaller ones, shew that these vessels also were 
used in connexion with fire. The two handles at the top crossing a longi- © 
tudinal groove were evidently used for the insertion of a bar, so that the 
vessel could be moved about when it was too hot to touch. It is possible 
that they were portable braziers for heating purposes, and used like the 
scaldini of modern Italy. } 


POTTERY FROM ZAKRO. 259 


5. From House I came fragments of a large unpainted Biigelkanne with 
three handles. 

6. A number of small (6-8 cm. high) jugs with one handle, and cups 
with or without handles. 

7. House I yielded two amphorae (Fig. 36) with their mouths pinched 
into two spouts between the two handles which are set high up on the 
shoulder of the vase. . These and another jug from House I with a spout, 
one handle, and body tapering very much below the shoulder recall very 
distinctly Kamares forms of household ware. 


Fic. 36. 


From House K came the fragment that made up into the barbottine 
filler represented in Fig. 37. This is the only piece of this ware found at 
Zakro. The zone adorned with bosses seems to have been entirely covered 
with black paint. On the smooth part of the vase the black paint forms a 
pattern of small sprigs powdered over the ground. This vase is interesting 
as shewing the survival of the barbottine style of decoration into late in the 
Mycenaean period. The exaggerated character of the bosses on this vase 
however clearly shews a much more advanced and even a decadent stage of 
this style of decoration, if it be compared with the neatness and smallness of 
the bosses used to decorate the earlier polychrome Kamares ware. 

The most important general conclusion to be drawn from this pottery is 
that, at Zakro at all events, the manufacture of Mycenaean and of certain 
classes of Kamares ware was contemporary. This is shewn not only by their 
common use of the same patterns, notably the tendril pattern, but also by 
the existence of vases which display the two techniques. On these vases, 
which have the bright buff slip characteristic of Mycenaean ware, a black 
ground is laid on which a true Kamares pattern in white is painted. 

Side by side with this it must be noted that several kinds of Kamares 
ware do not occur at Zakro. Vases with embossed patterns like metal-work 
or raised ornament are not found, with the exception of the filler described 
above. The geometrical patterns of the early Kamares style only appear on 
a very few fragments. Except a few fragments with red paint the only colour 
used is white; the yellow ochre found elsewhere does not occur here. This 


960. POTTERY FROM ZAKRO. 


would tend to shew that these are all characteristics of an earlier school of 
Kamares manufacture, and that the inhabitation of Zakro is. to be placed 
late in the Kamares period, at a time when good Mycenaean ware was 
already being made. 

It has already been suggested by Mr. Hogarth ‘that the pits were re- 
ceptacles for accumulations of votive offerings cleared out of a shrine. This 
is rendered still more probable by the uniform character of the pottery. -We 
have seen that in the pits two classes of vase are immensely more common 
than the others. These are the straightsided Kamares cups and the 
Mycenaean bowls. They were not found in the houses, and were therefore 
not used for domestic purposes. Their uniformity makes it probable that 
they were regularly used for votive offerings. Religious conservatism would 
tend to consecrate certain types of vessel for this purpose. 

Very little plain domestic ware was found in the pits, such as appeared 
naturally in the houses. The sacred character of the former is also indi- 
cated by the presence of the small cup described above bearing the crescent 
and disk in relief. . 

The generally later character of the pottery in the houses, which yet 
contain specimens of the finer pottery found in the pits, points to the con- 
clusion that the town was continuously inhabited from the time indicated by 
the earliest ware in the pits up to the time of the desertion of the place, 
which is assigned by Mr. Hogarth to the end of the Mycenaean period. 

The shrine connected with the pits must have been the sacred place of 
the town. The earlier character of the pottery of the pits is natural. A 
receptacle for votive offerings would contain more old offerings than new 
ones, whilst a house contains as a rule only the pottery in use when it was 
deserted. Still more would a pit used to receive an accumulation of its 
votive offerings present an earlier appearance. The absence from the pits of 
votive objects as late in character as the latest ware in the houses is natural 
if we suppose that the pits contain accumulations for whieh there was no 
longer any room in the shrine. For the latest offerings made at the shrine 


would never have been put into the pit at all. 
R. M. DAWKINS. 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 


I—TuHeEe ARRANGEMENTS OF THE STADIUM. 


THE recent discoveries at Olympia, Epidaurus, and Delphi have forced 
us to modify the old idea of the Greek race course based on the stadium of 
Athens and the Roman circus. It may perhaps be useful shortly to state 
the evidence which we now possess, 


A.—The Homeric Race Course. 


- Running is the most universal, the oldest of all forms of sport, and the 
primitive form of a race is that which the competitors run from one point to 
another—the germ of the stadium or straight race—or where they race round 
some distant object and back to the starting place—the germ of the diaulos 
and other turning races, as the Greeks call them (κάμπειοι). This simple 
type of race, which we may see to-day at school treats and rustic meetings, 
requires no apparatus but two posts, stones, or other objects to mark the 
starting point, and the finish, or turning point ; and it is this primitive type 
that we find in Homer. In the twenty-third Iliad? Achilles places the 
heroes in a row and points out to them the τέρματα afar off, not the goal, as 
we can see by comparing the similar expressions used of the chariot race, but 
the turning point. In the chariot race this was a withered stump a fathom’s 
height above the ground, with two white stones set on either side, and by it 
Achilles set an umpire, godlike Phoenix, ‘that he might note the running 
and tell the truth thereof.’ Just such a figure appears in later times on 
vases? standing with his forked rod beside the turning point ready to 
chastise any offence or breach of the regulations. The starting point in 
Homer is called νύσσα, a word generally used of the turning point, but 
signifying merely a ‘meta’ or post, and so equally applicable to either end, 


B.—The Hippodrome type of Race Course. 


From this primitive type two types of race course are derived. The 


first we may call the Hippodrome type, where as in Homeric days the horses 


or men race round two posts, connected by one or more intermediate posts, or 


1 πιαὰ xxiii. 757, ef. 358-301. 2 Of, Hartwig, Meisterschalen xvi. 


262 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


by a low wall like the ‘spina’ of the Roman circus. This type of course was 
not confined to horse racing, and though generally superseded in foot races 
by the more elaborate arrangements which we find at Olympia and else- 
where, it reappears in later times when the glory of the foot race has already 
declined with the growth of professionalism and luxury. Thus the stadium 
at Athens first built by Lycurgus in the 4th century B.c. and magnificently 
rebuilt by Herodes Atticus in the 2nd century of our era was divided by 
alow wall running down the middle and connecting three pillars, one of 
which, a square pillar with the heads of Hermes and Apollo set back to back, 
is in the museum at Athens. A similar arrangement is described by a 
scholiast to Soph. Hlectra 691, who mentions three square pillars bearing on 
either side an inscription, the first ἀρίστευε, the second σπεῦδε, the third 
κάμψον. A distinctive feature of these later courses is the semi-circular 
theatre or σφενδόνη at one end or, as in the Roman circus, at both ends, 
This circular ending, which doubtless served for various gymnastic or other 
contests, does not belong to the earlier type of course which we find 
at Olympia, and in the case of Delphi it seems to have been a later 
addition. Ina course of this description the runners were not separated 
in any way from one another and opportunities for foul play must have been 
frequent, especially at the turn. That such foul play did occur is proved by 
the regulations against tripping or otherwise interfering with an opponent.* 
According to a tradition preserved by Statius® such an incident occurred at 
the founding of the Nemean games, when Idas seized Parthenopaeus by the 
hair and so prevented him from winning. Adrastus directed that they 
should run the race again and that to prevent a repetition of such tactics 
they should run on opposite sides of the course. Again, Vergil ® represents 
Nisus as purposely tripping Salius. These practices if they belonged to 
Greek times at all must have been confined to the type of race course 
described, or to races run in the same way. 


C.—The Starting Arrangements. The ὕσπληξ. 


Of the method of starting on such a course we cannot speak with 
certainty. The two primitive methods of starting are by means of a line 
drawn in the sand,’ or by a rope placed in front of the competitors, which is 
dropped at the moment of starting. This latter method was undoubtedly 
employed in the chariot races. At Olympia the chariots were arranged in 
pairs along the sides of an isosceles triangle, the apex of which pointed to 
the right of the first ‘meta.’® Ata given signal the ropes or ὕσπληγες in 


3 For the stadium at Athens v. Frazer, Paus- Ἢ, 1. 
anias ii. 205; at Olympia v. Olympia ii. 63 5 Stat. Theb. vi. 616. 
and Frazer, iv. 78; at Delphi, B.C.H., 6 Aen. v. 335. 
1899, pp. 601-615 ; at Epidaurus v, Frazer, v. 7. Schol. to Pind. Pyth. ix. 118 ἐχάρασσον δὲ 
576. γραμμήν τινα, hy ἀρχὴν καὶ τέλος εἶχον of ἄγωνι- 
4 Lue. cal. non tem. cred. §12; Paus. νυ. 24. 2. ζόμενοι. -- -----.. 
vy. Krause, Gymnastik der Hellenen, ,p. 363, 8 Paus, vi. 20. 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE, 263 


front of the pair-nearest the base were dropped ; as this pair drew level with 
the next pair the next ropes fell, and so on until the whole field were fairly 
started. The plural ὕσπληγες therefore came to denote ‘the starting place,’ 
and the phrase ὥσπερ ἀπὸ μιᾶς ὑσπλαγίδος ὅ is used proverbially in Aristo- 
phanes to describe a simultaneous start. It is difficult to decide how far the 
use of this term as applied to the foot race is metaphorical, how far it is 
based on fact. In the epigram written by Antipater on the celebrated Ladas 


ἢ yap ἐφ᾽ ὑσπλήγων ἢ τέρματος εἶδε τις ἄκρου 
ἠΐθεον, μέσσῳ δ᾽ οὐ ποτ᾽ ἐνὶ σταδίῳ 1 


the word may be used metaphorically. But the use of a rope in starting is 
distinctly implied in the somewhat obscure words of Lycophron 


ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἄκραν βαλβῖδα μηρίνθου σχάσας 

Ν fel > , , fal 

ἄνειμι λοξῶν εἰς διεξόδους ἐπῶν 

πρώτην ἀράξας νύσσαν ὡς πτηνὸς Spomeds." 


And a much later writer Heliodorus in his fanciful description of an armed 
race describes the start by the words 


ἔσχαστο μὲν ἡ ὕσπληξ, τέτατο δὲ ὁ δρόμος." 


More convincing evidence is afforded by an inscription published in the 
"Ed. ’Apy. 1884, 169, referring apparently to repairs of the stadium, in which 
occur the words 


> ,ὔ \ Ν a e / fal - fal , 
ἀφέσεις τὰς ὑπὸ τῶν ὑσπλήγων τοῦ παναθηναϊκοῦ σταδίου. 


From these words and from the expression of Lucian ἔπεσεν ἡ ὕσπληξ,13 we 
may infer that the rope was raised some height above the ground; from the 
use of the word σχάξειν, which denotes opening or slitting something tight 
like a vein or a haggis, we may conclude that the rope was stretched tight. 
Moreover it must have been dropped or let go very suddenly and pulled 
away quickly to avoid entangling the runners’ feet, and this sudden loosening 
of the tight rope was accompanied by an audible sound which is referred to 
in the epigram on Pericles." 

Dr. Hauser” has tried to identify the ὕσπληξ on two vases, a Bourgui- 
gnon skyphos which I shall discuss later,® and a kylix in his own collection. 
But M. de Ridder” has pointed out that in the former the supposed line is 
too indefinite to be of any value, and even if it is a rope, it is resting on the 
ground; while on Dr. Hauser’s kylix the line which passes through the 
hoplite’s right hand may with more probability be regarded as a spear: for 
the identical position occurs on a Pamphaeus kylix in the Louvre (G. 5), 


® Aristophanes Lysistr. 1000. οὐδεὶς oldev ὅλως" δαιμόνιος βραδυτής" 
10 Anth. Pal. ix. 557. ὁ ψόφος ἦν ὕσπληγος ἐν οὔασι καὶ στεφανοῦτο 
1 Lycophron 18. ἀλλὸς καὶ Περικλῆς δάκτυλον od προέβη. 
19. Aeth. iv. 3 f. ~ 18 Jahrb, 1895, p. 193. 
15. Lucian, Zim. 20. ; 16 P, 282, Fig. 10. 
᾿ i Anth, Pal. xi. 86 ' W B.C.H. 1897, p. 233. 


τὸ στάδιον Περικλῆς εἴτ᾽ ἔδραμεν, εἴτ᾽ ἐκάθητο 


264 E. NORMAN GARDINER © 


where there can be no doubt that the object is a spear. The proposed 
identification must therefore be regarded as a failure. 

It appears then from the evidence that a rope was sometimes used for 
the start of the foot race. This practice was probably borrowed from the 
Hippodrome, and at a late date when the importance of the foot race was 
decreasing. A starting rope would be supérfluous with the elaborate starting 
arrangements of Olympia; indeed there is direct evidence that it cannot 
have been used. With a rope, just as with the starting gate which has been 
introduced of late years in the horse race, there is no possibility of poaching 
at the start or of a false start. Yet such incidents were quite familiar to the 
Greeks. In the council before Salamis Adeimantus says to Themistocles, 
ἐν τοῖσι ἀγῶσι of προεξανιστάμενοι ῥαπίζονται.8 How could a runner start 
too soon if kept back by a rope? Again in Aristophanes, Zqwites the 
sausage seller protests against Cleon’s trying to steal a march on him, 
ὑποθεῖν οὐκ ἐῶ —no poaching at the start. How could he start before him 
if they were both kept back by a rope? In later times Plutarch describes the 
runners at Olympia as σπουδάζοντας περὶ τὴν ἄφεσιν ἵνα wrEoveRTHTwoLW,” 
and Julian implies that those who started too soon were called back to the 
start. Such passages are incompatible with the use of the ὕσπληξ and 
when we set beside them the constant allusions in writers of the 5th century 
to the γραμμή or starting line 55 we are led to the conclusion that the use of 
the ὕσπληξ in the ae race was ‘a late invention, and even then never 
became universal and was only used in the Hippodrome type of course with 
its νύσσαι or its spina, and not in the type with which recent. discoveries 
have made us familiar. 


D.—The Stadium of Olympia. 


This second type is fitted only for foot races. There are no posts nor 
wall down the centre of the course, which is a long rectangle, terminated at 
either end by a row of stone slabs. At Olympia these slabs are 4 ft. 2 in. 
long and 1 ft. 6 in. broad,*divided from one another by square sockets, 
obviously intended to hold posts.. There are twenty of these slabs at either 
end at Olympia and each slab is marked longitudinally by two parallel 
grooves about seven inches apart. Similar slabs have been found too in the 
Gymnasium to the west of the altis. These grooves were clearly meant to 
mark the position of the runners’ feet, not so much in order to give a firm 
grip for the toes, much less for the heels as has been asserted,—for a slight 
roughening of the stone would have been far more effectual,—but rather: by 
defining the position of each foot to ensure a fair start. At Delphi we find 
a similar arrangement; but the lines on the slabs, of which there were pro- 
bably seventeen, are nearer to each other, only 34 inches apart. At Epi- 


18 Hat. viii. 59. ὁ 2 *1 ἐπὶ τὸν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἐπανάγομεν ὥσπερ of προεκ- 


19. Fg. 1162, . βώνταν ἐν τοῖς δρόμοις (Julian περὶ βασιλεία:). 
* Plutarch, Apophth. Lac, (Leont. fil. Euryer. 22 γραμμή, Aristoph. Acharn. 481. Eurip. El. 
§ 2). 7 955. Frag. 169. Pindar, Pyth. ix. 118, 


* 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 265 


daurus the lines are about 4 inches apart, but the stone sill only occurs at 
one end of the race course and there are only eleven pairs of lines. It 
seems probable that there was originally a second stone sill at Epidaurus 
also, but all trace of this has disappeared owing to the shallowness of the 
soil. The object of having ἃ stone sill at both ends was to enable all the 
races, whether over the single or double course, to finish at the same point. 
On a course with only a single sill, if there were any such, the winning post 
for the stadium must have been at the opposite end to that for the other races. 
In front of the stone sill at Epidaurus are seven stone pillars which seem to be 
remains of a later arrangement for starting, perhaps resembling the Roman 
earceres. A relief published in the Rim. Mitth. 1890, p. 156, Taf. 7, represent- 
ing runners apparently about to take their place behind a wooden barrier, 
perhaps shows us such an arrangement, but it is probably connected with 
the Roman circus rather than with the Greek stadium, and in the present 
state of our knowledge we can say nothing definite of these later arrange- 
ments at Epidaurus. 

In these stone slabs we have the βαλβῆδες or thresholds, a word which 
Philostratus uses in the singular to express the platform on which the 
diskobolos stood,” and we can now understand why this word like ὕσπληξ is 
commonly used in the plural. The lines on the slabs are the γραμμαί, the 
development of the line which, according to the scholiast to Pindar,* 
men used to dig to mark the start and finish. A passage in Eustathius 
seems to describe this system accurately: ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς δρομεῦσιν οὕτω καὶ 
ἐν TH ὀρχήστρᾳ γραμμαί τινες ἐγένοντο, tv’ ὁ χορὸς ἱστῆται κατὰ atiyov.” 
In a most interesting inscription discovered at Delphi and published in the 
B.C.H. 1899, we find these stone sills also called καμπτῆρες, or turning 
points, a word which properly describes the posts which separated the 
γραμμαί." 

This inscription contains details of expenses incurred in the archonship 
of Dion (B.c. 268) in preparing for the Pythian festival. First the ground, 
which had possibly been used as pasture land, had to be thoroughly cleared. 
This ἐκκάθαρσις cost 15 staters. Then it was dug up and rolled, the cxawis 
καὶ ὁμάλιξις costing a further sum of 110 staters. Six ἐπισκαφεῖα or pieks 
for harrowing were provided for digging the stadium and the jumping places 
or ἅλματα. Finally the course was covered with a layer of white sand, 600 
medimnoi being provided at a cost of 1} obols per medimnos. This inscription 
should finally dispose of the fiction that the Greeks ran races in deep sand. 
From Lucian’s*’ Anacharsis we learn that they practised running in sand 
as a severe form of training, but this does not prove that they raced under 
such conditions at the great festivals, any more than Aristotle’s remark * 


*3 Phil. Imag. i. 24. 27 Lucian, Anacharsis, 27. 
3: Pyth. ix. 118. = * Arist. De Gressu Anim. p. 709. οἷον ἐν 
356 Eustathius, 7). ix. p. 772. 9. ταῖς παλαίστραις of διὰ τῆς κονίας προιόντες ἐπὶ 


386 The sum of 36 staters was spent on the τῶν γονάτων. 
καμπτῆρες, B.C. H. 1899, p, 565. 
HS.—VOL. XXIII. T 


" 


266 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


about running on their knees in the Palaestra proves that they raced on 
their knees. : 

One more point remains. What was the use of the square sockets 
between the slabs? They were evidently meant for pillars, and it has been 
suggested that the course was roped as it is in the present day for the 
Hundred Yards Race. For this suggestion there is, I believe, no direct evi- 
dence, but we can understand how necessary it would be for every runner to 
have some definite point for which to run. Without such a point it would 
be very difficult to run straight in a broad track like that of Olympia, and 
we may therefore assume that even if the course were not roped the various 
posts were distinguished in some way or other so that each runner would run 
straight for the post opposite him, and that probably the line was marked in 
some way. Such a line would help to explain the phrase δραμεῖν ποτὶ 
στάθμαν (Pind. Nem. vi. 7). Prof. Bury states that στάθμη in Pindar never 
means ‘a goal’ but rather ‘a measure or rule’ and the phrase means ‘to 
keep to one’s course. The word might well denote the line, however marked, 
which connected the starting post with the post opposite it, the line to which 
each runner had to keep. 


E.— Heats. 


The arrangements at Olympia probably represent the usual arrange- 
ments of the course, at all events at the great festivals. A few words must 
be said about the question of heats (τάξεις). Our only information on this 
point is derived from Pausanias vi. 13. 2. The text of the passage is corrupt, 
but it appears that in the stadium race the competitors were divided into 
heats of four, the winners of which ran in the final, so that the winner had 
won twice, once in his heat and once in the final. This seems conclusive 
with regard to the stadium race. The race was the most important of all 
the athletic contests. The winner of the stadium race gave his name to the 
Olympiad, and in an Athenian inscription which enumerates the prizes for 
the Panathenaic festival®* the winner of the stadium race receives ten 
amphorae more than the winner of any other event. It was natural there- 
fore that particular pains should be taken with the arrangements for this 
race, but it does not follow that the same system was applied to the diaulos 
or even to the stadium race in the Pentathlon. In the latter it would have 
been undesirable to lengthen the competition by heats unless absolutely 
necessary, and the starting lines at Olympia allowed room for twenty to start 
together. In the diaulos possibly only half that number could have run; 
but it does not seem likely that the entries were large. The thirty days’ 
training at Olympia must surely have led to the weeding out of those who 
had no chance. At all events we may feel certain that in such a trying 
distance as 400 yards heats would have been avoided if possible. Else the 
triple victor who, having won two or more heats in the diaulos and two or 
more in the stadium, proceeded on the same day to win the long race, would 


39. C.I.A. ii. 2, 965, 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 267 


have been indeed a marvel. From the obscure and corrupt passage in 
Sophocles Electra, 691-2, it is impossible to argue. If heats were unlikely 
in the diaulos they were much more unlikely in the long race, the distance 
of which is variously given as 7, 10, 12, 20, 24 stades.°° The origin of this di- 
vergence is undoubtedly due to the fact that the distance varied at different 
festivals and at different times, just as in the present day. For Olympia the 
evidence is slightly in favour of a 24 stades race. But whether the race was 
one mile or three, there can have been nothing to prevent large numbers 
running together for such a distance, and heats would have been as tedious to 
the spectators as trying to the competitors. An epigram on one Charmos *! 
mentions 7 men running in the long race, and suggests a possibility of 
twelve running together. According to another epigram*? Hermogenes of 
Antioch beat nine competitors in a race. Such passages are sufficient to 
refute the idea that the Greeks always raced in heats of four. 


F.—The manner of running the various races. 


The next point to be considered is the manner of conducting the various 
races. The stadium race offers no difficulty: each runner ran straight to the 
post opposite his starting point. The question of the diaulos is more 
difficult. The centre socket in one of the lines αὖ. Olympia is larger than 
the others and Dr. Dorpfeld is of opinion that in the diaulos the other posts 
were all removed and only the central one was left, round which all the 
competitors raced. This theory is open to two objections. Those who 
started on the outside would have further to run than those who started in 
the centre. This inequality, amounting at the most to a yard, is not a really 
serious consideration in a race of 400 yards. It becomes more serious 
however when we consider the nature of the turn. In a race of this distance 
the runners would not be much separated in the first two hundred yards, 
and much confusion and crowding would result in turning sharply round the 
post. Everything would depend on reaching the halfway post first in order 
to avoid the confusion and delay in making the turn. Hence the loss or 
gain of a yard at the start might cause the best runner to be crowded out at 
the turn, and enable an inferior one to turn without trouble. Accordingly 
Flasch, Hauser, and others maintain with some plausibility that in the 
double race each man ran not to the central post but to his own post and 
then turned. At the same time we must remember that such crowding at 
the turn was allowed in the chariot race and it is impossible without further 
evidence to determine the point. But supposing that the separate posts 


30 Krause, Gymnastik der Hellenen, p. 348. can find no proof of the existence of a bye in 


* Anth. Pal. xi. 82. the races, though proofs are frequent of a bye in 
8 Anth. Pal. vi. 259 ' wrestling? and boxing. The analogy of the 
ἔτρεχε γάρ; καὶ πρῶτος ἑλὼν τίνας ;.-ἐννέα chariot race where we hear of ten chariots 
παῖδας. racing together (Soph. £/ectra) is an additional 


33 Mahaffy, Rambles and Studies in Greece,* argument against the general use of heats. 
p. 310. Mahaffy speaks of an ἔφεδρος but I 
- 


T2 


208 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


were used, how did they turn? Did they touch the post or toe the line and 
turn back along the same course by which they had come? Or did they 
turn to the left round the post to the left and return along a parallel course ? 
The evidence seems to me slightly in favour of the latter view. The name 
‘diaulos’ signifying a double channel seems in favour of it; so too is the 
passage in which Pausanias explains the method of writing βουστροφηδόν ™ 
by comparing it to the diaulos, or again the line in the Agamemnon of 
Aeschylus 343, 


κάμψαι διαύλου θάτερον κῶλον πάλιν. 


The analogy of the chariot race and the Homeric race supports this view, 
and the use of the words καμπτήρ and νύσσα, which Pollux defines as that 
point περὶ ὃ κάμπτουσι, though these words may refer to the Hippodrome 
or to the type of stadium which resembled it. Possibly a further confirma- 
tion of this view may be found in the vase paintings which I propose to 
discuss in connection with the armed race, though in this case it seems to me 
certain that the competitors raced round one common point and not 
round separate posts. But whatever was the case in the diaulos there 
can be no doubt that in the long race all competitors raced round the central 
posts at either end. In a long race the runners soon spread out; the pace is 
less and the difficulty of the turn is minimised. Moreover the system by 
which each man keeps to his own track, though convenient in a short race, 
is actually inconvenient in a long race when each lap has to be registered 
and each turn watched by the officials, and the runners themselves would 
find it difficult to know how they stood with regard to their fellow com- 
petitors. A Panathenaic amphora published in Mon. d. J. i. 22 actually 
shows four long distance runners running to the left towards a rough post. 
The foremost runner has just reached the post, his left foot just passing it. 
but he has not yet turned. The post of course might represent the finish, 
but the style of the running is opposed to this. To sum up: the separate 
posts were certainly used in the stadium race, possibly in the diaulos, but 
certainly not in the long race, which was run in the same way as the chariot 
race. 


IJ.—TuHeE EVIDENCE OF VASE PAINTINGS. 
A.—Style of Running. 


So far vase paintings have been of little use in our enquiry: but when 
we come to the style of the running and especially to the conduct of the 
armed race, vases are our chief authority. The difference of style between 
the Stadiodromos and the Dolichodromos as we see them on the Panathenaic 
vases is familiar to every one, Of the long distance runners I need say only 
that they are a model of style for all time *;, but the style of the sprinter as 
he advances by a series of leaps and bounds swinging his arms like the sails 


δὲ Paus, v. 17. 3. 35 Mon. d. I. x, 48. e. 4and f. 6, 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 269 


of a windmill is apt to provoke a hasty smile.’ Hasty, I say, because it 
neglects to take account of the extreme difficulty of depicting a sprinter, and 
of the character of the vases on which we see him. These are for the most 
part Panathenaic vases, prize vases which contained the oil given to the 
victors. The artists were limited to certain set subjects treated, as is natural 
with vases thus produced, usually in a conventional way, and not always 
drawn with great care. Many of those which have been preserved to us are 
archaic, many more are archaistic, and at first siglit the archaic is always apt 
to produce a smile. But if we make allowance for these facts, instead of 
laughing we shall rather wonder at the truthfulness with which, in spite of a 
sometimes grotesque exaggeration, the artists have really depicted the 
essential points of a sprinter, running on the toes, raising the knees, and 
using the arms. Homer is true to nature when he tells how Odysseus, as 
he neared the finish, prayed to Athene and she made him light both of hands 
and feet.*® So Philostratus says that the Stadiodromoi use their arms to 
increase their pace, οἷον πτερώμενοι ὑπὸ τῶν χειρῶν, while the long 
distance runners only do so at the end of the race, ie. in their sprint. In 
the present day nearly all sprinters make use of their arms, though the 
exaggerated use is not recommended; one well-known sprinter is described 
in the Badminton Athletics as a vision of whirling arms and legs. One has 
only to compare the Stadiodromoi on a Panathenaic vase with an instan- 
taneous photograph of a hundred yards race to realise that in spite of stiff- 
ness and conventionality the Greek artist was not far from the truth. The 
action of the armed runners is, as we should expect, more violent than that 
of the long distance runner, less violent than that of the sprinter. M. A. de 
Ridder in a paper to which I shall have to refer at length *° wrongly describes 
the Hoplitodromos as advancing by a series of leaps and bounds. The two 
examples figured in the Mon. αἰ. Inst. x. 48. 6. 8 and g.9 are sufficient to 
refute this; the first, an amphora now in the British Museum," dated 
336 B.C., shows four runners making a very moderate use of the arms and 
running on a perfectly flat foot; the second amphora, now in the Louvre, 
belonging to the year 323 B.c., shows three runners running on the toes, but 
with the right arm close in to the side as we see it in the long distance 
runners. The obvious inference is that the style of the armed runner comes 
between the styles of the sprinter and of the long distance runner. 


B.—The attitude of the Start. 


In connection with the armed race a number of questions have been 
raised by Dr. Hauser in the Jahrbuch for 1887 and 1895. In these articles 
Dr. Hauser tries to determine from vase paintings 


% Mon. ας, I. x. 48. f. 7, Gerh. A. V. 259 ; cf. 38 Jl. xxiii. 772. 
a very beautiful representation of wingéd run- 39. Phil. Gymn,. 32. 
ners published by Miss Hutton B.C. H. 1899, Ὁ B.C.H. 1897, p. 222. 
p. 158. “ B. M. Vases B. 608. 
7 Mahaffy, Rambles and Studies,® p. 308. 


270 E. NORMAN GARDINER 
(1) the position of the start, 


(2) the manner of the turn in the diaulos 
(3) the length and general arrangement of the armed race. 


His conclusions have been assailed by M. A. de Ridder in the 8.6, Η. for 
1897. Both writers appear to me to prove too much, and as I am unable to 
agree with either of them, I will venture to suggest a third view which is 
really a compromise between the two. 

First, as to the position at the start. In the Tiibingen bronze statuette,@ 
formerly described as a charioteer, Dr. Hauser believed that he recognised an 
armed runner whose shield had been broken off, and after much hesitation 
he decided that he was a runner ready to start. The bronze represents a 
bearded athlete with the right foot a few inches behind the left foot, almost 
level with the instep. Both knees are slightly bent, the body leans slightly 
forward ; the left arm which once carried the shield is bent and drawn some- 
what back, while the right arm is extended to the front slightly below the 
level of the shoulder. The whole attitude is that of a man at rest, but on 
the alert and expectant, ready for immediate action. Closely parallel to this 
figure is a red figured amphora from Naples, now in the Louvre,‘? showing 


Fic. 1.—R. F. AMPHORA IN THE LOUVRE. 


an armed runner in an almost identical position but with the body stooping 
forward a trifle more (Fig. 1). Opposite him is a draped figure with the right 
arm extended to the front and the hand bent backwards and upwards, an atti- 
tude which according to Dr. Hauser signifies ‘Halt!’ It is precisely the gesture 
of a photographer as he says ‘keep still please,’ and is most appropriate to’a 


” Jahrb. 1886, Pl. ix. 8. Bull. Nup. nowv. 86... vi. 7. 


a 


Ἣν ον 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 971 


steward starting a race. Still closer to the Tiibingen bronze is the figure on 
a Leyden kylix,** but in this case the official is replaced by a pillar which 
stands in front of the right arm of the athlete. It might well be one of the 
pillars at either end of the stone sill which we have found marking the start 
at Olympia. The same attitude recurs on a Berlin kylix * which represents 
the whole course of the armed race (Fig. 6). The right-hand figure of the 
three, whom I take to be on the point of starting, only differs from the previous 
figures in that the right foot is to the front, and the left heel is accurately 
represented as raised slightly off the ground with the result that the left 
knee is somewhat more bent than the right. The body too is bent more 
forward, in which respect it resembles an unarmed runner on a vase figured 
by Krause xv. 55,4 which seems to me beyond all doubt to represent an 


Fic. 2.—R. F. Kynix, FoRMERLY AT NaApues. (After Dubois-Maisonneuve). 


athlete practising starts in the Palaestra (Fig. 2). The athlete stands beside 
the pillar, the right foot foremost, the left heel slightly raised. He bends 
forward, his body almost horizontal, the right hand extended to the front 
and towards the ground, while the left arm is carried somewhat baek- 
wards for the sake of balance. A draped figure carrying a forked staff seems 
about to give the word to start. Lastly in a vase figured by Hartwig *’ we 
see another unarmed athlete standing by a pillar in the precise position of 
the Tiibingen bronze, except that as he has no shield to inconvenience him 
both hands are stretched to the front. Perhaps we may add to these the 
statue of the Victorious Running Girl in the Vatican, but the identification of 
this with the start is very doubtful. 

There can be no doubt that the motive in all these figures is the same, 


4 Jahrbuch, 1887, p. 99. to be regretted as the differences between the 
Ger. A. V. 271. 5: two drawings show that they cannot be accur- 
46. The vase is figured in Dubois-Maisonneuve. ately drawn. 

Taf. xxv. and Inghirami, Mon. Etruse, v. 2. 47 Meisterschalen, p. 45, f. 6; cf. a similar 

Taf. \xx. 1t was at Naples, but i have failed figure on a vase belonging to Sir F. 

to discover where it is now. Thisis the more described below p. 288. 


212 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


but do they represent the start? The most important point in which they 
all agree is the position of the feet ; a point which is to my mind conclusive, 
inasmuch as it corresponds accurately with the position required by the two 
lines on the slabs which mark the start at Olympia, Epidaurus, and Delphi. 
These lines are from 4 to 7 inches apart, and the hind foot on all the vases I 
have mentioned and in the Tiibingen bronze is level with the heel or instep of 
the front foot. This position of the feet is decidedly unusual and determines 
the whole attitude of the body; and the agreement between the starting lines 
and this position of the feet is the very strongest proof that the moment 
represented is that of the start. Unfortunately Dr. Hauser, not appreciating 
the importance of this point, confines his attention to the bend of the knees, 
and extension of the hands to the front. This neglect of the position of the 
feet has led him to assign to the same motive vases representing several 
distinct motives. With the vases which I have mentioned as really showing 
the start, he compares a number of vases showing two types not of running, 
but of jumping. In one type the feet are absolutely parallel, the legs together, 
and the knees very much bent, while both hands are swung to the front (Figs. 
3 and 4). In one of these vases the performer is actually standing on a raised 


Fic. 3.—PELIKE BELONGING TO Fig 4.—R. F. Kyuqx, 
Dr. HAvseEr. MuNICH. 


ATHLETES JUMPING WIrHOUT HALTERES, 


stand (βατήρ). 5 In the other type the legs are more or-less separated, the hind 
leg alone is bent, and the position represented is almost identical with that 
of the jumper on the Berlin or British Museum bronze diskos.” Both series 
are extremely interesting as showing undoubted types of jumping without 
weights, but the discussion of them comes under the heading of jumping, not 
of running. Other vases are grouped under the same head by Dr. Hauser 
because he has failed to consider the general intention of the painter. For 
example in the black figured oinochoe in the British Museum δ᾽ showing a 


48 Hancarville, Ant. dtr. gr. ct rom. T. iii. 66. article, and B.M. E. 101. 
Krause ix. 23, Hauser, Jahrbuch, 1887, p. 106. 49 Jahrbuch, 1895, loc. cit. Figs. 7, 8, 9, 10. 
cf. Jahrbuch, 1895, Figs. 3, 4 in Hauser’s 50 ΒΜ, Vases B. 628. | 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 273 


Hoplitodromos standing in a statuesque attitude upon a raised bema, the 
obvious intention of the artist is to represent not a living athlete but a statue. 
This is shown by the stiff attitude of the Hoplitodromos, the gesture of the 
priest or worshipper who stands before the figure, and the presence of the 
pedestal. Or again to take another vase in the British Museum,®! the long 
thin athlete who is stretching out his hand with a mocking gesture must not be 
separated from the short, fat-bellied boxer opposite to him (Fig. 5). The motive 


Se, eh | 
Ὁ" “ἕω. 


WS 
a 


Fic. 5.—R. F. Kyuix in B.M. 


is, as Mr. Cecil Smith explains, obviously humorous, and represents some 
altercation between the two.°* Perhaps the fat boxer has challenged the other 
to decide the dispute with the gloves! One feels tempted to ask whether 
the artist may not be caricaturing some characters of his own time. But 
Dr. Hauser does not seem to realise that Greek athletics and the Greek 
palaestra had a lighter side, that Greek life was full of humour, and much 
study had not blinded the Greek artist to the appreciation of humour. 
Again, apart from the context of the figure, its position has but a superficial 
resemblance to the series which represent the start. The position of the feet 
is not the same, they are all but parallel. But let that pass. In the Tiibingen 
bronze and the figures resembling it, the body rests chiefly on the front leg, 
or on both evenly, and both knees are bent. Here the weight of the body 
is on the back leg, the knee of which is absolutely straight, and the whole 
balance of the body is changed at once. The position of the feet and the 
balance of the body are the essentials in deciding whether any particular 
figure represents the start of a race. Dr. Hauser by paying attention to 
superficial points is led little by little away from the original position till he 


5. B.M. Vases E. 6. Paidotribes, and the supposed resemblance of 
% Cf. Zannoni. Scavi di Bologna. Taf. xxii. the attitude to the Vatican Running Girl is 
where the central figure is clearly talking tothe utterly worthless. 


974 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


ends by confounding together types that are absolutely contradictory. To 
verify this, one has only to put oneself into the various attitudes and try the 
effect of a few starts in each attitude. 

Setting aside these vases which clearly represent other types let us 
consider how far the general attitude represented by the Tiibingen bronze is 
consistent with our interpretation of it, as a runner starting. Several objec- 
tions have been raised. Dr. Hauser hesitated long before adopting this 
view on account of the ‘starke Kniebeugung.’ Indeed in‘his first article 
he concluded that the movement shown was not that of the start, but that 
of the restart after the turn in the diaulos, a view which he only abandoned 
from the false analogy of a figure representing a Lampadedromos, which I 
propose to discuss later. M. A. de Ridder repeats the objection in far 
more emphatic language ‘On congoit qu'il n’est pas de condition moins 
favorable, ni de plus contradictoire au départ.’ And he proceeds to explain 
the whole series as representing athletes preparing to jump! 

I confess I utterly fail to see the force of the objection. A visit toa 
modern race meeting, or reference to pictures representing a start, such as 
the one shown in the Badminton volume on Athletics, would surely convince 
Dr. Hauser and M. A. de Ridder that both knees are always more or less 
bent at the start: when the feet are only a few inches apart, there can be but 
little difference in the bend of the knees, and in those vases where the heel 
of the hind foot is raised off the ground there is a corresponding difference 
in the bend of the knees. It is true that the difference is often more marked 
in a modern runner, but then the feet are much farther apart. Whereas, 
with the position of the feet as determined by the starting lines, I cannot 
conceive any position of the knees as possible other than that which we are 
considering. It is precisely the bend of the knees which may be seen any 
day on the cricket or football field, the position of one standing ready, on 
the alert to field the ball, or tackle an opponent. Surely M. de Ridder 
would not have either or both knees straight ! 

Further the position of the body and the hands agrees with that of the 
feet and knees. Just as in modern times, the precise angle of inclina- 
tion of the body is largely a matter of individual taste, and there is a natural 
tendency to balance the body by stretching one or both hands to the front. 
With a shield on the left arm, the right arm is naturally extended in front. 
In the unarmed race, if the body is much bent, the arm corresponding to the 
front leg must be well advanced, and the other arm kept back. If the body 
is nearly upright, both arms may be brought to the front. In any case the 
arms must be used to balance the body; but the position of the feet does 
not admit the free use of the arms which we used to see before the present 
method of starting off the hands was introduced. For we must never lose 
sight of the fact that we are not considering whether such and such a posi- 
tion is the best according to our modern ideas, but whether it is appropriate 
to the conditions of a Greek start, i.c., with the feet close together. That 
the position of the Tiibingen bronze is appropriate I have tried to show. 

Again, if it does not represent a runner about to start, what does it 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. | 275 


represent? M. A. de Ridder says a jumper preparing to jump. But a 
jump must be taken off both feet or off one. In the first case the feet must 
be absolutely parallel, in the second case the feet are well apart. Both 
positions are illustrated in the vases which Dr. Hauser has wrongly brought 
forward as parallels to his Hoplitodromos, and which M. de Ridder rightly 
interprets as depicting the jump. But the position with one foot a few 
inches behind the other is appropriate neither to a jump off both feet, nor to 
a jump off one foot. 

M. de Ridder, however, brings forward a most curious argument to prove 
his view. There is nothing to show, he says, that the scenes depicted refer 
to the stadium at all, and not rather fo the Palaestra. The pillars may 
mark the Palaestra as well as the stadium, the draped figure with the rod 
may be a Paidotribes just as well as a Brabeus or Agonothetes. This is 
quite true, but not so his next statement. ‘Tout exercice en vue d’un jeu 
est nécessairement différent du jeu méme.’ M. de Ridder obligingly shows us 
the particular from which he has arrived at this extraordinary generalisation. 
Pausanias *' describes the votive offering of Epicharinus as a Hoplitodromos 
‘practising for the armed race. How did Pausanias know that he was 
practising instead of racing? Because the practice was necessarily 
different from the actual race. What then was the practice for the armed 
race? The characteristic of the Hoplitodromos, says M. de Ridder, was that he 
advanced by a series of leaps and bounds. What practice could be more 
useful for such a style than jumping? Therefore the Hoplitodromos was 
represented in the statue as jumping! This too is the meaning of the 
Tiibingen bronze, and of all similar vase paintings!®** M. A. de Ridder 
completes the ‘ reductio ad absurdum’ of his own theory when he solemnly 
ascribes a similar method of practice to the Lampadedromos! 

The description of the style of running is as I have shown appropriate 
to the Stadiodromos rather than to the Hoplitodromos; but the radical 
fallacy of the whole argument lies in the words I have quoted. The 
principal training for any athletic event does not differ in kind from the 
event itself. However useful other exercises may be for producing fitness, 
the diskos thrower must practise the diskos, the jumper jumping, the 
sculler sculling, the cricketer cricket. No amount of physical training will 
make up for this special training. So it is with running. The runner may 
keep himself in training by other forms of exercise, but the most important 
part of his training is on the running path. It is true he does not in 
practice habitually run the same distance as in the actual race. But the 
style of running is the same in practice as in the race, and if he is a sprinter 
he must especially practise starting. The Greek must have practised not 
only starting but turning, and this practice must have taken place as far as 
possible under the same conditions as in the actual race. Accordingly we find 


9 48..0. \ hoplite, sur le point de sauter en présence 
“δὲ So Reinach describes the Hoplite on an d’un arbitre des jeux.’ Répertoire des Vases 
amphora mentioned above as ‘Athléte armé en _peints, i. 494. 


210 E. NORMAN GARDINER © 


at Olympia remains of starting lines in the gymnasium precisely similar to 
those in the stadium. Therefore in studying athletic scenes on the vases it 
makes no difference whether the painting represents the practice or the 
competition, the gymnasium or the stadium. The start and the turn must 
have been the same in practice as in competition. These being the most . 
important parts of practice it would be strange indeed if we did not find them 
represented among the hundreds of vases which picture Greek athletics, 
But if the vases which I have described and the Tiibingen bronze do not 
represent the start, where is it represented? ‘The argument from omission 
becomes still stronger when we remember that the Greek artist does not as a 
rule depict moments of violent action but prefers moments which mark the 
beginning or conclusion of action. In the diskos, the spear, the jump, in 
wrestling, and in boxing we have numerous representations of the prepar- 
ations for each event, and of the moment before: it would be extraordinary 
therefore if in running alone this moment were omitted. 


C.— Vases representing the Turn in the Diaulos. 


Assuming that we have recognised the position of the start, let us try to in- 
terpret the Berlin kylix (Fig. 6), which I have mentioned, setting beside it two 
other vases, a kylix formerly at Berlin, of which a drawing is preserved in that 
Museum (Mappe xxi Taf. 82), and a kylix of Euphronius figured by Hartwig, 
Meisterschalen, Pl. xvi. In all three the runners run in opposite directions 
and it is therefore agreed that they represent a diaulos, and the turn in the 
diaulos. In all three the principal movement is from right to left, and the 
turn is made to the left. In two of the three an official is standing by with 
his forked rod ready to see fair play. In all three the turn is represented 
by the pair of runners to the left. It is on this point that I join issue with 
Dr. Hauser and M. de Ridder, who both maintain that in the Berlin kylix 
the two runners to the right represent the turn. For convenience I will keep 
the numbers which Dr. Hauser has given to these three figures. Dr. Hauser’s 
theory absolutely ignores the attitude of the runner on the extreme left 
(No. 4), who is leaning forward with his right leg bent, while his head and 
body and right arm are all turned to the left. According to Dr. Hauser he has 
already turned and is well on his way back. If so, why is his body turned 
to the left? He cannot be merely looking back, a position which is 
represented on the other side of this very kylix, for his whole body is 
turned and the right arm swung across the body; an action which certainly 
justifies Dr. Hauser in saying that No. 5 will soon pick him up. 

The only possible explanation of this remarkable attitude is that the 
runner is in the act of turning. He has checked his speed as he nears the 
post, and then in order to turn with the least possible loss of ground he 
advances his right foot just in front of the post and throws his weight 
forward, at the same time turning his whole body to the left. The next 
moment he will bring up his left foot to a level with the right and turning 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 277 


on the left foot start back again with short steps, and throwing his body 
forward, the right arm still to the front steadying the shield. This is the 
attitude of No. 6, who cannot possibly be checking his pace before the turn 
as Dr. Hauser suggests. This explanation leaves us free to class No. 5 with 
_ the figures whom we have already recognised as starters. The position of 
the feet could not possibly occur after the start they are far too close 


Fie, 6.—R. F. Kyirx, Berwin. 


together to represent even the short steps of a runner starting again after 
the turn. This explanation of the three figures is confirmed when we 
compare the group to the left with the similar group on the Euphronius kylix 
(Fi ). Here the relative positions of the two runners show that the figure 
turning round with an anxious look towards the official has not quite reached 


gh the position of the body and the shortened stride 
ready thinking of the turn, The figure to the left who 
“we 


oie 


278 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


has already turned is in exactly the same attitude as No. 6 on the Berlin kylix. 
The drawing of our third vase preserved in the Berlin Museum (Fig. 8) shows 


Fie, 7.—R. Ε΄ EvpHronius Kyurx, Paris. (After Hartwig.) 


Fie. 8.—R. F. Kynix, FoRMERLY IN BERLIN. 


the turn still more clearly both in the interior and on the exterior. In both 
cases we see a runner checking himself before the turn by throwing the 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 279 


body back, and stretching his right arm to the front. 
This action is more strongly marked in the figure on 
the exterior, but in opposition to Dr. Hauser I be- 
lieve that the moment represented on the exterior is 
earlier than that shown on the interior. The differ- 
ence is of little importance, but the more violent 
check seems likely to precede the less violent atti- 
tude where the runner is recovering his balance and 
is shortening his step. The second figure in each 
case shows the actual turn, but again the turn is a ~ 
trifle more advanced on the interior than on the 
exterior. I have endeavoured to arrange the positions 
shown on these vases so as to give a complete picture 
of the turn (Fig. 9). It is remarkable how accurately 
they follow one another. Six stages are marked : 

1. The body is thrown violently back to check 
the pace. 

2. A shorter step follows, the body still thrown 
back but not so violently. 

3. The right leg is advanced level with the 
turning point, the body being thrown forward and at 
the same time turned to the left. 

4. The left leg is brought up level with or slightly 
in front of the right, the body being thereby brought 
to the upright and continuing to turn. 

5. The turn is completed on the left leg, the 
right hand grasping the edge of the shield to 
steady it. 

6. Throwing the body forward the runner starts 
on the return journey with short steps. 

Of course I do not wish to assert that these po- 
sitions always followed one another in this order, but 
the mere fact that it is possible so to arrange them, 
shows the accuracy with which the vase painters ob- 
served the various positions at the turn. 

It remains to consider the other figures on our 
vases, 

In the Berlin kylix we have seen that both the 
start and the turn are represented. On the other 
side three men are running at full speed to the 
left. In the interior a single figure runs at full speed 
to the left looking backwards as if with an air of 
triumph. Does he represent the victor? The same 


Fic. 9.—ReEcoNsTRUCTION OF THE ARMED RACE, SHOWING THE POSITION OF STARTING ON THE RIGHT AND THE TURN ON THE LEFT. 


*® Cf, B.M. E. 78 (Fig. 13 below). 


280 _E. NORMAN GARDINER 


type occurs in the centre of a B.M. kylix E 22, and another kylix 
E. 21 shows an unarmed runner wreathed in the very same position. 
Such single figures might well represent the victor, and, if so, our kylix depicts 
every phase of the race from start to finish.* 

Coming to the Euphronius kylix we find a group of three figures to 
the right of the Brabeus. The left hand figure of the three may belong to — 
the group on the left,in which case his position is probably the same as No. 1 
or 2 in our series. But symmetry seems to suggest that he belongs to the 
right hand group. The central of the three figures is putting on his greaves, a 
performance which according to Heliodorus * did take place at the start, 
while the other two figures are perhaps engaged in a preliminary canter, such 
as is described by Statius,®® in which case the runner with uplifted hand and 
body bent back is perhaps stopping before turning back. Perhaps this may 
be the explanation of the right hand group on the lost Berlin kylix, though the 
context suggests that it really represents the actual race, and that the figure 
to the left has accidentally dropt his shield. The other runner has evidently 
just started, his short step and the forward inclination of the body reminding 
one of the runners who have turned on the Berlin kylix (No. 6), and on the 
Euphronius kylix. 


D.— The Character of the Armed Race. 


These three vases suggest certain points about the armed race. In the 
first place the turn appears to be made vownd some point. There is no 
indication of touching any object, and turning back, or of toeing a line. 
Moreover the post round which they turned must have been fairly high, 
otherwise the body would not be thrown forward, as it is, so as to clear the 
post. Therefore if the runners each ran in his own track, they must have 
turned round the post to the left, and returned by the other side. But 
secondly the attitude of the runners halting, with their right hands out- 
stretched, and the way in which they look back at their fellows seem to 
indicate that they are not running in parallel tracks but all together round 
some common turning point. As I pointed out, even if the runners in the 
diaulos ran each round his own goal, it does not follow that the armed 
runners did the same. The weight and encumbrance of their armour would 
make the race much slower, and so increase the distances between the 
runners and lessen any unfairness that might be caused by the start. At the 
same time there would be considerable danger of fouling (κακοτεχνία) at the 
turn, and strict regulations would be necessary to check it. The hoplites who 
are stopping so suddenly on the lost Berlin kylix seem to be anxious to avoid 
fouling those in front of them, and thereby disqualifying themselves. Lastly, 
the less elaborate arrangements, would I believe, be in complete accord with 
the character of the armed race, a point on which I must say a few words. 


56 Murray, Greek vases in B.M. 18. Cf. Jiithner Antike Turngerdithe, p. 67. 


57 Similarly a Duris kylix in the B.M. E. 58 Acth. iv. 8 f. 
53 shows all the successive stages in boxing. 59 Theb. iv. 587. ee Y 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 281 


The armed race belongs to what we may call mixed athletics, that is to 
say competitions conducted under fancy conditions, such as obstacle races, 
races in uniform, swimming races in clothes and all the many events which 

-make up a modern Gymkhana meeting. Such events are popular in 
character: they are not intended for the specially trained athlete any more 
than a point to point steeplechase is intended for the race horse or the cart 
horse. Signs are not wanting that the armed race belonged to this class. 
The entries were apparently large. Twenty-five shields were kept at 
Olympia for use in the race, though the starting lines only provided separate 
places for twenty runners. In such races the more competitors the better. 
Again the armed race was the last event on the programme at Olympia, 
and elsewhere, and the last event is often of a less serious character than 
those that have gone before. In modern sports we often end with a sack 
race, or an obstacle race, and we find the same motive on the Greek 
stage, where the tragic trilogy was followed by. a satyric drama by 
way of relief. If we had the complete list of the prizes at the Panathenaic 
games I believe we should find that the Hoplitodromos did not receive 
so many amphorae as winners in the other events. Unfortunately the 
inscription ® is here wanting, but some confirmation of my point is 
provided by the parallel of the chariot race. The winner of the chariot race 
proper received 140 amphorae, the second 40 amphorae. In the race for war- 
chariots the winner received 30 amphorae, and the second 6 only. If such 
a distinction was made between the race horse and the war horse, it is 
not unlikely that a similar difference existed in the foot races. In assigning 
this popular character to the armed race, I do not wish iu any way to under- 
rate it, nor is such a view at variance with the importance which Plato 
attached to it on utilitarian grounds, Plato himself condemns the training 
of the professional athlete, the object of athletics being according to him not 
to train athletes, but useful soldiers and citizens ; and for this very reason he 
insists on running in armour. Just so with us, the professional runner would 
despise the obstacle race, as not serious athletics. But the practice of the 
obstacle race is an important part of the physical training of our soldiers, for 
the man who can win such a race is more useful in war than the champion 
sprinter. 

Again there is always something incongruous and comic in the sight of a 
person running fast in inappropriate costume, a gentleman in a top hat and 
frock coat with an umbrella in his hand, or a soldier in full uniform with his 
rifle. There must have been something comic in a race of Greek hoplites 
with shields and high crested helmets, and this comic side is surely alluded 
to by Aristophanes when as he passes the chorus of birds in review he makes’ 
Peisthetaerus exclaim (Aves 291). 


ἀλλὰ μεντοι τίς ποθ᾽ ἡ λόφωσις ἡ τῶν ὀρνέων ; 
ἣ ᾽πὶ τὸν δίαυλον ἦλθον ; ἱ 


6 6.1.4. ἢ. 2. 968. 
H.S.—VOL, XXIII. υ 


o% a. + ΜΝ 


282 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


“ 


Comic incidents must sometimes have occurred, such as the dropping of a 
shield, an accident which may be depicted on the lost Berlin kylix as I 
have suggested. 

Perhaps this view may help us to explain various vase paintings collected 
by Dr. Hauser which show runners without their shields, holding their 
helmets in their hands, putting down or taking up their shields. Dr. 
Hauser tries to show on this evidence that the armed race was a double 
diaulos, that the runners on reaching the turning point put down their 
shields, and ran without them, but took them up again when they reached it 
the second time. That this was the practice at the greater festivals, there is 
no proof, and in the absence of direct evidence we must assume that it was 
not so. At the same time these scenes may well refer to certain forms of 
running practised in the Gymnasia, or to certain races held at the less 
important local meetings. Such popular sports naturally lend themselves to 
variations. The Greeks were fond of acrobatic and gymnastic tricks, and 
spending as they did so much of their time in athletics we may be sure that. 
they varied the seriousness of pure athletics with lighter competitions of the 
Gymkhana type. 

We have direct evidence that there were such variations in the armed 
race. Philostratus expressly states οἱ δρόμοι οἱ ὁπλῖται ποικίλοι καὶ 
μάλιστα οἱ κατὰ Νεμέαν, ods ἐνόπλους τε καὶ ἱππίους ὀνομάζουσιν." 
After discussing the traditional origin of the armed race at Olympia, he 
adds that the best of all the armed races was that at Plataea, first on 
account of its length, secondly on account of the heavy armour used, which 
was the same as that in actual warfare, thirdly because of its strict regula- 
tions, by which anyone who had once won the race, if he entered a second 
time, was liable to the penalty of death if defeated. From this passage we 
see that the variety in the race consisted partly in distance, partly in 
equipment. The ordinary distance appears to have been a diaulos. The 
term ἵππιος may denote a double diaulos: the race at Plataea was 
evidently of unusual length. Plato in the Laws suggests an armed race of 
excessive length, 60 stades for the heavy-armed hoplite, and 100 stades 
across country for the light-armed bowmen. Here we see that Plato 
suggests different styles of armament. Philostratus describes the equip- 
ment used at Plataea as ποδήρη καὶ σκεπάζουσαν τὸν ἀθλητήν. Vases 
show us that the use of greaves was gradually discontinued. In the earliest 
vases the usage varies. After 520 B.c. the use of greaves is general, After 
450 B.c. it disappears entirely.® 

But the epithet ποικίλος implies more than mere difference in distance 
or equipment, it implies distinctly the fanciful element of the Gymkhana, 
and I venture to put forward this idea as a possible explanation of a 
number of Hoplitodromos vases, otherwise unexplained. It is of course 
impossible to obtain any certainty as to the details; it will be sufficient. 
if we can thus give a general explanation of certain of these scenes. 


61 Gymn. 7. 62 Hauser, Jahyb. 1895, p. 199. 


᾽ 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 283 


Let me first take the skyphos from the Bourguignon collection which I 
have already referred to, on which Dr. Hauser thought he saw a trace of 
the ὕσπληξ. We see a hoplite with a shield on his left arm, stretching 
forward and supporting himself on bis right arm, his feet being close to a 


Fic. 10.—Bourcuicnon Skyruos, (After Hauser.) 


pillar. On the other side of the vase, but probably connected with the 
same scene, is a bearded official wearing a himation and carrying a long rod, 
with his right arm outstretched in a gesture of command. Dr. Hauser 
describes this hoplite’s position as a ‘wahres Kunststiick von Balance, and 
suggests that it represents the position of starting, the object of so 
unnatural a position being to prevent any competitor from poaching at the 
start. M. de Ridder rightly sees the absurdity of supposing that the Greeks 
started in so impossible a position, and he finds in it merely a gymnastic 
exercise of ‘assouplissement,’ and compares it with the lost Naples vase 
already mentioned ® which undoubtedly represents a start. The position is 
a familiar one in gymnastic drill at the present day, known as ‘the front 
leaning rest on the right arm’, and is certainly not such a marvel of balance 
as Dr. Hauser supposes. But 1 have been unable to find any vase painting 
of which we can be certain that it represents any form of gymnastic drill. 
I doubt whether the Greeks of this period practised ‘exercices d’assou- 
plissement.’ Physical drill is for those who lead a sedentary life in cities, 
not for those who lead an active life in the open air like the Greeks. 
Dr. Hauser’s explanation seems nearer to the truth. For though it is 
impossible to regard this position with him, as a recognised position for the 
start in serious athletics, such a fanciful position may well have occurred in a 
race of the less serious type at less important meetings, or in the matches 
that must have been constantly arranged among the youths in the various 
Palaestrae. For example in the present-day the runners in an obstacle race 
are sometimes made to lie down for the start. 

Another vase where the fanciful element is yet more obvious is a Munich 
kylix (Fig. 11, Jahn 803). The sponges and implements hanging on the wall 
show us that the scene belongs-to the Palaestra. There are five figures. 
Two fully armed Hoplites run to the left, carrying their shields in both 


63 Fig. 2, p. 271. 
9 β v2 


.» 


284 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


hands in front of them, certainly a most difficult position for running. 
The figure to the left is leaning back, in a position similar to that which 
we have already seen, apparently to check his pace. Three other athletes 
run to the right. The runner in the centre is entirely unarmed; perhaps 
he is merely a Stadiodromos practising and has nothing to do with the other 
four. The other two have helmets but no shields. The different directions 
of the runners clearly indicate some form of the diaulos, The whole group 
seems to suggest a race where the runners on reaching the turn put down 
their shields and return without them. Perhaps the unarmed runner repre- 


Fic. 11.—R. F. Kyzix, Municu. 


sents a second lap where they further divest themselves of their helmet. 
But it is useless to go into details. Wecan merely recognise in this scene 
one of the varieties of the armed race of which Philostratus speaks. The 
motive of putting down or taking up the shield—it is hard to be certain 
which it is—-is shown on three other vases mentioned by Dr. Hauser, a 
kylix of Hischylos, (Klein, Meistersign. 98.7), a kylix in the Museo Torlonia 
at Rome, and a Munich kylix (Jahn 1240). A Lykos kylix published by 
Hartwig (PI. xii), which shows us a runner striding over a shield which lies 
on the ground, may possibly belong to this group. 


E.—The Finish of the Armed Race. 


There are a number of vases where the runner holds his helmet in his 
right hand. Dr. Hauser classes this type with the vases I have just discussed, 
and if he is correct, they afford most valuable confirmation of the theory 
which I have put forward. This motive occurs, however, too frequently, I 
fear, to be connected with any particular variety of the hoplite race, or, as 
M. de Ridder holds, to represent merely a practice for the race; and it is 
therefore better if possible to connect it with the regular type οὗ hoplite 
race. It occurs on the following vases : 


— See’ eee 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 285 


1. B.M. E 818. R.F. kylix (Fig. 12). 
Ss To the right is a fluted pillar, against which lies a shield, appar-. 
: ently belonging to a runner who is just passing the pillar. He lifts his right 
hand towards his head,a movement which we have already found on the 
Euphronius kylix and the lost Berlin kylix, and which occurs on the Lykos 


a, 
4% 
VS, 


OK ωὰ 
λλὶ ATR 
ee HS 


τον 


Fic. 12.—R. F. ΚΥΠΙΧ ΙΝ Β.Μ. 


kylix mentioned above. Further to the left another runner looks back on 
him with a look of triumph holding his helmet in his right hand. The 
position of the head occurs in the centre of the Berlin kylix, where we 
suggested that possibly the victor was depicted. Further to the left is an 
official resting on a staff and holding a forked rod. 


2. Pelike. Vienna. (A7ch. Anz. 1892, pp. 172 and 198). 


To the right a pillar. Beyond it a runner holding his helmet in his 
right hand, and shield on left arm, strides to the left towards an official 
with the usual forked rod. On the ground lies a shield with a helmet on 
the top. 


3. B.M. E78. R.F. kylix (Fig. 13). 


A Palaestra scene, in which the only figure who concerns us is a 


286 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


Hoplitodromos to the right. He is leaning backward in the attitude of the 
runners stopping before the turn on the lost Berlin kylix. His right knee is 
bent, his left leg straight, and he holds his helmet in his right-hand behind 
the body. The attitude is frequent with jumpers and diskoboloi, and is the 
natural attitude of a runner who suddenly stops, not, as stated in the catalogue, 
of a runner about to start. 


4, Kylix. Mus. Gregor. 1xxi. 46. 

A Hoplitodromos with helmet in right hand behind the body ΔΡΡΤΟΑΘΗ͂ΘΕ 
a pillar. 

5. Amphora. Palermo, 2120 (Jahrb. 1895, p. 198). 


A Hoplitodromos moving to the right looks back at an official of 
the usual type and holds his helmet in his right hand level with his 
head. 


6. Amphora. Naples, Heydemann, 3083. 
Almost identical with No. 5. 


7. Kylix. Berlin, 4039, Coll. Sabowroff I 53. 


A runner in a somewhat stooping attitude runs to the right apparently 
about to put down his shield, the rim of which seems to touch his left foot. 
He holds his helmet in right hand behind the body. 


8. Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, R.F. kylix, Hartwig, Meisterschalen, 
Fig. 14, not mentioned by Hauser (Fig. 14). 


Fic. 14.—R. F. Kyurx, Camprincr. 


A runner in a somewhat stooping attitude, his shield held low on 


left arm, helmet in right hand in front of body. On his head he wears a 
wreath, 


To these we may perhaps add 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 287 


9. An amphora from the Bourguignon collection. (Jahrb. 1895, p. 199, 
Fig. 34). 

The runner moves towards an official who makes a gesture as if to 
stop him. He lifts his right hand to his helmet as if about to take 
10 off. 

This same gesture occurs on 

10. Lykos Kylix (Hartwig. pl. Ixii. 1). 

The runner’s shield lies on the ground, and his right hand almost touches 
his helmet. The whole attitude is almost identical with that of the right 
hand runner in No. 1. In both cases it seems as if he has thrown his 
shield down and is about to take off his helmet; in this kylix he is evidently 
checking his pace. In the field are a strigil and aryballos. 


If these scenes do. not belong to some variety of the hoplite race, or to 
practice merely, but to the regular race, what do they represent? The 
solution is to be found, I think, in the first of the series. In this vase as in 
Nos. 2, 4, we find a pillar. This pillar must represent one end of the course, 
either the start, or the turn, or the finish. We have seen similar pillars at 
the start, and at the turn, and we have recognised certain positions as be- 
longing either to the start, or to the turn, to which these do not correspond. 
The inference is that here we have the finish of the race, or the moment just 
after the finish, and further examination confirms this view, In no case are 
the runners going at full pace, in most cases they are clearly checking their 
pace, in No. 3 the check is most marked. In Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6,9, we see an 
official, probably the Brabeus with his forked rod, whom we have also seen at 
the start and at the turn. In Nos. 1, 2, the runner has just passed the post, 
in No. 4 he is just reaching it. In No. 1 we see tworunners, the first, as Mr. 
Cecil Smith says, wins easily, the second seems not to have dropt his shield 
but thrown it down, perhaps in disgust. In No, 2a second runner, perhaps 
the winner, is suggested by the shield and helmet on the ground. In neither 
of these vases is the attitude appropriate either to the start or to the turn, 
while all the details point to the finish. Finally what could be more natural 
than at the close of a 400 yards race in armour under a scorching sun to take 
off the cumbrous, heavy helmet! Perhaps too it may have been a point of 
etiquette for the winner to do so, just as a cricketer returning to the pavilion 
after a fine innings takes off his cap. And so the attitude may be symbolical 
of victory, and the single figures which we see in Nos. 7 and 8 may represent 
the victor, and the wreath around the hoplite’s head may be the wreath of 
victory. To determine the motive of a.single figure is difficult, but surely 
nothing could be more natural than to represent a runner as a victor, by intro- 
ducing some gesture typical of victory, either the helmet in the right hand, 
or the back-turned head, as I suggested in the centre figure of the Berlin 
kylix, or both as in the first vase of this series, The Lykos kylix presents 
greater difficulties. Has he dropped his shield, as in the lost Berlin kylix, or 
ts he defeated as in the vase just mentioned, or does he belong to the previous 


288 E. NORMAN GARDINER 


group of runners who put down their shields at the turn? The attitude must 
have been a familiar one in the palaestra, and perhaps the strigil and 
aryballos in the field indicate that this is merely a palaestra scene. 


F.— Arming for the Race, and other scenes. 


If my explanation of this group is correct, our series is now complete. 
We have seen the start, the actual race, the turn: now we have the finish. 
To these we may add vases which show athletes arming before the race. This 
scene occurs on the Eupbronius kylix already described, and also on a kylix in 
“the British Museum (E 22). The youth in the centre is bending down to 


Fig, 15.—R. F. Kyurx ΙΝ B.M. E. 22. 


take his shield from its cayua. On the other side we see four hoplites run- 
ning in very precise and regular order and holding spears in their right hand 
as if about to throw them. , It has been suggested that they represent a 
a variety of the armed race in which the runners carried spears, and a similar 
explanation has been given of a vase figured by Gerhard (A.V. 258.4). This 
seems hardly probable. Apart from the danger of running with spears, 
especially in a race involving a turn, the regularity of the runners is much 
more appropriate to some purely military exercise, such as a charge, and this 
view is confirmed when we compare them with Gerhard 4.V. 258. 1, which can 
only represent a charge. There is moreover no literary evidence for such a 
race. The combination of a purely military exercise with preparations for the 
armed race suggests that the latter, as we might have expected, formed a 
regular part of the hoplite’s training. 

Since the above was written another most interesting kylix belonging to Sir 
Frederick Cook has been exhibited at the recent exhibition of the Burlington 
Fine Arts Club (Pt. III. 17). I much regret that I am unable to reproduce it; 


it is to be hoped that it will soon be published. The interior represents arobed — 


official, standing between a low seat and a fluted pillar, the exterior two 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 289 


groups of Hoplitodromoi. On the one side are two youths running to the left, 
holding their helmets in their right hands in front of them. They are 
checking their pace, with the right leg advanced and straight and the body 
leaning back. Between them is a robed official holding a forked staff. To 
the right isa skapane. On ‘the other side, we see a fluted pillar to the right, 
and another runner in the same position as the first pair running to the left. 
Beyond him is another official as on the other side, looking towards an un- 
armed youth who stands with both hands extended to the front, the right 
foot a few inches in front of the left, and the knees slightly bent. His position 
is identical with that of the runner figured by Hartwig (fig. 6) which I have 
already described in connection with the start. On the ground beside him lies 
his shield with his helmet upon it. 

This interesting vase has many analogies with those already described, 
but has also some special difficulties. The skapane apparently indicates that 
the scene is in the Palaestra. As inthe Munich kylix one of the runners has 
taken off his shield and helmet. He is apparently practising starts unarmed. 
The other three all hold their helmets in their hands. The one by the 
pillar might well represent the finish, as in the vases already discussed, but 
what of the other two? Perhaps they are practising without their helmets 
for comfort, or perhaps the artist has taken a typical position in the race 
which pleased him, and repeated it for the sake of symmetry. Such 
symmetrical arrangements are very common in athletic vases, and this 
vase is essentially symmetrical. We must not forget that the vase-painter’s 
object is not to illustrate a treatise on Greek sports but to produce a 
pleasing picture, and that considerations of space and composition are 
more important for him than the literal representation of actual arrange- 
ments. Hence vases, invaluable as they are for the style and positions of 
Greek athletes, are not always safe guides for the actual arrangements of the 
sports. 

In the preceding discussion I am conscious how much I have left vague 
and uncertain. Vases often suggest rather than prove, and it seems safer to 
try to interpret their suggestions generally rather than to explain dogmatically 
every detail without sufficient evidence. It will be sufficient if I have shown 
the various movements of the armed race represented on the vases and certain 
general characteristics of the race. 


G.—The lighter side of the Greek Athletics. 


In the view which I have taken of the character of the armed race I 
have assumed that the comic element would enter into Greek sports; we 
may go further, there were certain races which were essentially comic, such 
as the Lampadedromia, and the Oschophoria. The Lampadedromia was of 
course a religious or festival race, originally connected with the worship of 
the fire-god. But the history of Greek comedy sufficiently proves that the 
comic element was not excluded from Greek religion, and Aristophanes is our 
witness to the comic character of the torch race. It is a pastime essentially 


290 ‘pb, NORMAN GARDINER 


for the young, and Bdelycleon mentions it together with hunting the hare and 
the boar ( Vesp. 1203) as types of the youthful exploits of which his father 
should boast 
ἀλλ ws ἢ κάπρον 
ἐδιώκαθές ποτ᾽ ἢ λαγών, ἢ λαμπάδα 
ἔδραμες, ἀνευρὼν ὅ τι νεανικώτατον. 


The stooping attitude adopted by the runners in their efforts to keep 
the torch alight was proverbial. 


ἂν yap τὰν πόλιν 
ἶ ὧπερ λυχνοφορίοντες ἐπικεκύφαμες 
says the herald describing the sorry plight of the men in the Lysistrata (1002) ; 
and again in the Frogs Aeschylus says of the degenerate youth of the day 
(Ran. 1087) 
λαμπάδα δ᾽ οὐδεὶς οἷός τε φέρειν 
ὑπ᾽ ἀγυμνασίας ἔτι νυνί. 


And Dionysus tells how he nearly died of laughter at the slow clumsy efforts of 
some fat, white-fleshed youth toiling along in the rear, bent double (κύψας), 
while the potters at the gates speed him on his way with slaps on various 
portions of his person. 

It is just this stooping attitude which is depicted on a small kylix 
published by Dr. Hauser. The drawing is poor and much broken, but it 
shows us clearly a torch runner standing near a pillar, his feet close together, 
his knees much bent, stooping forward with the torch in his left hand, a 
picture of comical anxiety, such as is familiar to all who have seen an egg 
and spoon race. Is he standing ready to start, as Dr. Hausersays? It seems 
very likely. In a drawing so much damaged, we cannot say what the pillar 
represents, it may represent an altar, or it may represent the pillar at the 
start of the race. But whether our torch runner is about to start, or not, and 

personally I am inclined to think he is, his attitude has no conuection what- 
soever with that of the starter in the armed race, or in the stadium. And yet 
it is the evidence of this figure which convinces Dr. Hauser that the Tiibingen 
bronze represents the start, and not, as he first said, the restart after the turn. 
For the torch race, he says, was no diaulos, and there was no turn. But if 
Dr. Hauser treats this vase too seriously, M. de Ridder is far more to blame, for 
he calls attention himself to the passage in the Fregs to which I have 
referred. He interprets both vase-painter and poet with the same want 
of humour. We are not dealing, he says, with a real race, because the 
torch race started from an altar, and in the vase we see a pillar. The 
pillar, he says, denotes the palaestra where the torch runners practised, and 


then he quotes the above lines of Aristophanes to show how severe must 


have been the training for the torch race. How then, he asks, did the torch 
runner practise? Surely by jumping, which must have been as efficacious 


for the torch runner as for the Hoplitodromos. And so the explanation of the ~ 
vase painting is obvious, the torch runner is practising jumping. This is a — 


NOTES ON THE GREEK FOOT RACE. 291 


fair statement of M. de Ridder’s argument, set. forth on pages 231 and 232 

of the Bulletin for 1897. One can only regret that a writer of such learning 

should have given his authority to a theory, the fallacies of which must be 
obvious to anyone who has any practical knowledge of athletics, or who can 
enter at all into the spirit of Aristophanes. 

Another race, where the festal element was yet more strongly marked, 
was the Oschophoria connected with the worship of Dionysus. Certain youths 
dressed in women’s clothes ran bearing branches of grapes from the temple of 
Dionysus to that of Athena Skiras, the winner receiving as his prize a drink 
made of wine, honey, cheese, flour, and oil. A somewhat similar ceremony 
called Staphyledromia took place at the Spartan Karneia. 

This lighter side of Greek sports might be further illustrated from the * 
vase paintings, especially from those which represent the sports of boys. To 
take a single example, we often see boys with hoops; sometimes they are 
being crowned ; on a Vienna krater δ’ we see a youth with a hoop receiving a 
a prize. These vases clearly suggest some form of hoop race. Caricatures of 
athletic subjects are not infrequent. A kylix exhibited at the Burlington 
Fine Arts Club ® shows an excellent caricature of the chariot race. Other vases 
depict a variety of acrobatic performances. Such scenes help to remind us 
how fragmentary is our knowledge of Greek sports and games, and teach 
us that if athletics were a serious business with the Greeks they had also a 
lighter side which must not be forgotten. Greck life was full of humour, 
and without a sense of humour it cannot be understood. 

In conclusion I must express my indebtedness to Dr. Hauser for kindly 
allowing me to reproduce several of the vase paintings which he has published. 
If I have ventured to differ from him in certain details, I freely acknowledge 
that his careful researches have laid the foundation of our knowledge of the 
armed race. My thanks are also due to Mr. A. 8. Murray for permission to 
reproduce certain vases from the British Museum, and also to Mr. H. B. 
Walters of the British Museum for the constant assistance and advice which 
I have received from him. 


E. NorMAN GARDINER. 


$4 4.Z. 1877, Pl. xiv. ἐδ Part IIT. 75. 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 


‘Tis thou, alone, who with thy Mistick Fan, 
Work’st more than Wisdom, Art, or Nature can 
To 1aise the sacred madness.’ 


HERRICK. 


VIRGIL in the first Georgic, at an early stage of his enquiry into the 
service of Ceres, enumerates first various heavy agricultural implements, the 
‘ponderous strength of the plotigh-share,’ the ‘slow-rolling waggons of the 
Eleusinian Mother, ‘hurdles’ and ‘harrows, and the ‘grievous weight of 


the mattock.’ 


Next he passes on to tell of the husbandman’s lighter gear. 


Virgea praeterea Celei vilisque supellex, 
Arbuteae crates, et mystica vannus Iacchi.! 


The object of the following paper is to discuss three questions that arise 


out of Virgil’s statement. 


1. The exact nature of the ‘ fan, its shape and use.” 
2. The precise sense in which the ‘ fan’ is called ‘ mystic.’ 
3. Classed as it is among the instruments of Ceres, how and why did the 


‘fan’ pass into the service of Iacchus ? 


Virgil takes the fan, its mysticism and its connection with Iacchus as 
known ; but, happily, by the time when Servius wrote his commentary (fourth 
century A.D.), the fan, and still more its mysticism, had become matter 


' Virg. Georg. i. 165. Serv. ad loc.: Id est 
cribrum areale. Jfystica autem Jacchi ideo ait 
quod Liberi patris sacra ad purgationem animae 
pertinebant: et sic homines ejus Mysteriis 
purgabantur, sicut vannis frumenta purgantur. 
Hine est quod dicitur Osiridis membra a 
Typhone dilaniata Isis cribro superposuisse : 
nam idem est Liber Pater in cujus Mysteriis 
vannus est: quia ut diximus animas purgat. 
Unde et Liber ab eo quod liberet dictus, quem 
Orpheus a gigantibus dicit esse discerptum. 
Nonnulli Liberum Patrem apud Graecos 
Λικνίτην dici adferunt ; vaxnus autem apud eos 
λίκνον nuncupatur; ubi deinde positus esse 
dicitur postquam est utero matris editus. Alii 
mysticam sic accipiunt ut vannum vas 
vimineum latum dicant, in quod ipsi propter 


capacitatem congerere rustici primitias frugum 
soleant et Libero et Liberae sacrum facere. 
Inde mystica. 

2 The ‘fan’ has been discussed by Bliimner, 
Technologie, p. 8, and the processes of winnowing 
by Schrader, Real-lexicon, s.v. ‘ Worfeln.’ 
To both of these authorities I owe many 
references, but neither appears to be aware that 
a ‘fan’ of substantially the same shape as that 
in use in classical days is in use to-day, nor do 
they accurately describe the method of its use. 
I should like to say at the out-set that what is 
new in my discussion so far as it relates to 
the shape and use of the ‘fan,’ is entirely 
due to the kindness of Mr. Francis Darwin, 
to whom this paper owes its inception. 


. he , “Ὕ, 
em pA de Se “> 
τι! δ "ὦ 
i ΄ - 


_ Fs . 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 293 


for antiquarian enquiry. His note, though somewhat confused, is the locus 
_ elassicus on the fan and must be given in full at the outset. 
‘The mystic fan of Iacchus, that is the sieve of the threshing-floor. 
He calls it the mystic fan of Iacchus, because the rites of Father Liber had 
reference to the purification of the soul, and men are purified in his mysteries 
_ Α8 grain is purified by fans. It is because of this that Isis is said to have 
_ placed the limbs of Osiris, when they had been torn to pieces by Typhon, 
on a sieve, for Father Liber is the same person, he in whose mysteries the 
fan plays a part, because, as we said, it purifies souls. Whence also he is 
called Liber, because he liberates, and it is he who Orpheus said was 
é torn asunder by the Giants. Some add that Father Liber was called by the 
¥ Greeks Liknites. Moreover the fan is called by them liknon, in which he is 
". currently said to be placed after he was born from his mother’s womb. 
Others explain its being called ‘mystic’ by saying that the fan is a large 
wicker vessel in which peasants, because it was of large size, used to heap 
their first-fruits and consecrate it to Liber and Libera. Hence it is called 
‘mystic ’.’ 

Servius is mainly concerned to explain the mysticism of the ‘fan.’ This 
he does, after the fashion of his day, by noting all the current opinions 
(ἔνδοξα) that he happens to know and leaving the reader to sort them as 
best he may. All the portion of his commentary that relates to mysticism 
must stand over till our second enquiry is reached. For the present we 
have only to ask what Virgil and his commentator contribute to the solution 
of the initial problem. 


1.—The exact nature of the fan, its shape and use. 


From Virgil himself we learn only two things, (a) the ‘fan’ is an agri- 
cultural implement, (0) it is ἃ light implement made of some wicker-work. 
The word itself ‘fan’ (vannus) of course implies that it was used for 
‘fan-ning,’ i.e. in some way ventilating, exposing to, or causing wind. Our 
modern ‘fan’ is an instrument for causing wind,’ but as will later be seen 
(p. 311), the motlern ‘fan’ is by no means coextensive in meaning with its 

᾿ earlier form ‘ van.’ 
‘ : Turning to Servius: he defines the ‘fan’ at the out-set as ‘eribrum 
areale’ the ‘sieve of the threshing floor. We shall find later that this is 
true, but by no means the whole truth; a sieve might be used as a ‘fan’ 
but every ‘fan’ was not necessarily a sieve. The function that sieve and 
‘fan’ have in common is that they are both implements employed in the 
purifying of grain by winnowing. At the end of his commentary Servius 
ey states another current opinion somewhat incompatible with the 


᾿ 3 The connotation of our modern ‘fan’ has wind’ analogous to that employed by the whirls 
ΐ dD en the source of much confusion;_even οἵ the twrudan or bull-roarer. The same con- 
2 re (Custom and Myth, p. 36) is fusion prompted the charming lines by Herrick 
to conjecture that the use of the that stand at the head of this article. See also 
Ὁ vannus was a ‘mode of raising a sacred . 312. ι 


294 JANE E. HARRISON 


‘sieve’-theory. According to this other view the fan is a large wicker 
vessel to contain first fruits. Finally (midway in his discussion) he states a 
fact all-important for our induiry: the fan of the Latins is the same as the 
implement known among the Greeks.as a liknon and this liknon gave to the 
Liber of the Greeks (i.e. to Dionysus) the title Ziknites. Dionysus was - 
called Liknites, ‘He-of-the-liknon, because on his birth he was placed in a 
liknon. 

The substantial identity of vannus and liknon is of great importance. 
References in Latin authors to the vannus are few and scanty, whereas of the 
nature of the Greek diinon we have adequate evidence both in literature and 
art. Hence assuming for the moment that Servius is correct in identifying 
the two we shall best elucidate the vannus by examining the extant evidence as 
to the use and shape of the lzknon. 

(a) The liknon was used as a cradle—This is definitely stated by Servius, 
and his statement is confirmed by earlier evidence both literary and monu- 
mental. The instance from literature may suffice. In the Homeric Hymn ἢ 
to Hermes we read . 

ἐσσυμένως δ᾽ apa λίκνον ἐπῴχετο κύδιμος ‘Epis - 
σπάργανον ἀμφ᾽ ὦμοις εἰλυμένος, ἠΐτε τέκνον 
νήπιον ἐν παλάμῃσι περ ἰγνύσι λαῖφος ἀθύρων 
κεῖτο. 

Ancient art shows us precisely what this liknon-cradle was like. The 
design in Fig. 1 is from a red-figured kylix® in the Museo Gregoriano of the 


Fic. 1.—HERMES IN THE LIKNON. 


Vatican. The child Hermes, wearing his characteristic broad petasos, sits up in: 
his liknon and looks at the stolen cows. The liknon-cradle is a wicker-work,. 
shoe-shaped basket with two handles. Whether it is closed at the end like 
a shoe or open like a shovel or scuttle cannot in this case be determined. A 
basket closed at the end would unquestionably make a more satisfactory cradle;. 
as 10 would keep the child in. 

The liknon as cradle appears on coins of imperial date.® Two instances are’ 


4 Hom. Hymn. ad Mere. 150. Bithynia, p. 158, Nicaea, No, 42, Pl. xxxii., 
5 Baumeister, Abb. 741, and Mus. Greg. 14. For the coin of Hadriani Brit. Mus, Cat. 
Etruse. ii. 83. 14. Mysia, γ.. 74, No. 10, Pl. xvii, 10. 


6 For the coin of Nicaea see Brit. Mus. Cat. 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 295 


given in Fig. 2. In the coin of Nicaea to the left the child Dionysus is 
seated in or rather on a liknon; he has both hands raised ; behind him is his 
emblem the thyrsos. In the coin of Hadriani, to the right, the child in the 
liknon wears a petasos, and is therefore certainly Hermes. The shape of the 


Fic. 2. 
NICAEA. HADRIANI. 


liknon on the two coins varies considerably, but both are obviously made of 
wicker-work and both have the characteristic shovel-like outline, high at one 
end and low at the other, a shape essential as will later be seen to the 
primary function of a liknon, and convenient though not absolutely necessary 
for a cradle. 


Fic. 3.—CuILp ΙΝ Lixnon, (Terracotta Plaque.) 


No handles are visible on the /iknon of the coins, though in designs of 
so small size they might, even if supposed to exist, be omitted. That handles 
were not an integral part of the liknon is clear from the design in Fig. 3 


296 JANE Ἐ. HARRISON 


from a terracotta plaque in the British Museum.’ This representation, the 
subject of which will be discussed later, is of special value because it is one 
of the rare cases in which we get a front view of a liknon. The high curved 
back and the shallow open front are well shown. 

An excellent instance of the liknon as a cradle is given in the design in 
Fig. 4, the right end of a sarcophagus now in the Fitzwilliam Museum at 
Cambridge.8 The liknon here is carried by its two handles, that to the left _ 


; 
ἷ 
3 
: 
A 
4 
: 
᾿ 


Fic. 4..—CHILD IN LIKNON, (Pashley Sarcophagus. ) 

being clearly in view. It is made of closely plaited wicker-work ; the weay- 
ing is obviously too close to allow of the liknon being used asa sieve. The 
mystical intent of the scene will be discussed at a later stage of the argument 
(p. 323), but one point must be noted: the liknon contains not only a child 
but fruit. On the original three round fruits, probably apples, are clearly to 
be made out; in the photograph reproduced in Fig. 4 they are obscured. 
This brings us to the second point. 


(0) The liknon is used as a basket for firstfrwits. 
remembered, said that this was one of the uses of the vannus. 


7 No. 11. From a photograph. The design 
has been frequently published before, but 
always from slightly inaccurate drawings. 

8. No. 31. See Michaelis, Ancient Marbles in 
Great Britain, p. 252. Fig. 4 is from a photo- 
graph. The sarcophagus was found at Arvi on 
the South coast of Crete by Pashley and 
figured by him, though inadequately, in his 
Travels in Crete, ii. pp. 18-19. The design in 
Fig. 4 occurs also at the end of the Farnese 
sarcophagus (Gerhard, Antike Bildwerke, Pl. 


Servius, it will be 
Hesychius 


111. 3); it may have been from the Farnese 
sarcophagus, Prof. Colvin suggests, that 
Raphael borrowed his design. In the Kestner 
Museum at Hanover there is a majolica plate 
on which the design in Fig. 4 is substantially 
reproduced, The two mencarry the childin the 
liknon, but in the background a little 
Renaissance landscape is added. This interest- 
ing plate will it is hoped be published by Dr. 
Hans Graeven, who kindly drew my attention 
to it. : 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 297 


defining λεῖκνα says ‘ baskets in which they place the grain, for that is what 
they call wheaten crops.’ The liknon in use as a basket for fruits frequently 
appears in Hellenistic reliefs. The design in Fig. 5 is from a relief? in the 


Fic. 5.--LIKNoN WitH Fimstrruirs. (Hellenistic Relief in Louvre.) 


Louvre Museum. A /iknon piled high with fruits is carried on the head of 
a small boy. An old man—whether priest or peasant is uncertain—holds it 
behind and helps to balance a weight that looks too heavy for the child to 
support. Between them they are about to place it on the altar near which 
a priestess expects them. Hiding in the tree stem to the right a rabbit waits 
till the holy rite is accomplished and his turn comes. The liknon in this 
case seems to be of wood, not basket-work, and it is elaborately shaped, but. 
its form has all the essential points, i.e. the high raised back and low open 
front. se 

The liknon with firstfruits was not only brought to the altar, but also 
formally dedicated and set up in sanctuaries. This is clear from the design 
in Fig. 6, the upper portion of a Hellenistic relief in the Glyptothek at 
Munich.” Inthe middle of a circular shrine surmounted by votive disks is 


® Schreiber, Hellen. Reliefbilder, lxx. προβασκάνιον. Ina relief in Vienna (Schreiber, 

10 Schreiber, Hellen. Reliefbilder, lxxx. This xeviii) a liknon is represented as set up in 
design, as regards erection of the liknon, does much simpler fashion, It stands on a plain 
not stand alone. Ona reliefin Copenhagenin pillar; near it are masks, a lyre, and other 
the Thorwaldsen Museum (Schreiber, lxix.) a Dionysiac gear. In an unpublished relief in 
liknon is seen erected on a similar structure; the Campo Santo at Pisa the liknon is 
above it is a great goat’s head, no doubt asa accompanied by a youth ringing a bell. 


HS.—VOL. XXXIII. x 


298 JANE E. HARRISON 


a high erection crowned by a liknon containing a phallos, leaves, and fruits. 
From the pedestal which supports the liknon are suspended two bells, set 
there no doubt with prophylactic intent. The liknon in this case has no 
handles but is furnished with holes at the side. It is clearly open at the 
left end, as the grapes and leaves fall over. 


Fic. 6.—Lriknon Erectep. (Hellenistic Relief in Munich.) 


This relief is of considerable importance, because it enables us to under- 
stand a reference to the liknon in Sophocles. In one of the fragments the 
following injunction is issued to, presumably, the craftsmen of Athens: 

Bar’ εἰς ὁδὸν δὴ πᾶς ὁ χειρῶναξ λεώς, 
of τὴν Διὸς γοργῶπιν ’Epyavnv στατοῖς 
λέκνοισι “ροστρέπεσθε."" 


The Ergane worshipped with the service οὗ likna is, as I have elsewhere 13 
suggested, goddess of “Epya in the Hesiodic sense of tilled land, rather than 
of the needle and the loom, and even the ‘craftsmen folk’ worship her with 
her accustomed agricultural rites, with the offering of firstfruits in likna 
formally set up somewhat after the fashion of the /iknon in Fig. 6. Of course 
in primitive days the likna would be set up in a simpler way, without the 
elaborate architectural surroundings. 


So far then we have clearly established that the liknon was a basket ot 
peculiar shape used as a cradle and for firstfruits. But the word liknon 
itself is evidence that both these uses are secondary. The word λέκνον 
is derived* from a root which means to clean grain by winnowing. The 


1 Soph. Frg. 724, 13 The etymology of λίκνον is discussed later, 
12 Cl, Rev. 1894, p. 270 f. p. 311. 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 299 


question at once arises: have we any evidence that a basket such as that used 
for a cradle and for firstfruits was used for the actual operation of cleaning 
grain, and if so how ? 

Happily baskets of precisely the same shape as the Jiknon of the Greek 
monuments just discussed are still in use for winnowing, and the process, 
though almost obsolete owing to the introduction of winnowing machines, can 
still be seen." 

In Fig. 7 we have the side view of a winnowing basket now in the Fitz- 


william Museum. The side view is given that it may be compared with the 


Fic. 7.—MopERN WINNOWING ‘FAN’ FROM FRANCE. 


liknon seen in profile in Figs. 1, 2 4, 5, and 6. The comparison will show that 
the shapes are closely analogous. 

In Fig. 8 the liknon is in use. The photograph was advisedly taken 
so as to show the winnowing basket in as nearly as possible the same position 
as the basket in Fig. 3. The basket in Fig. 3 has, as already observed, no 
handles, otherwise the analogy is seen to be very close. 

The art of winnowing with this form of basket is difficult to describe 


"νὴ υνυδ δεν 


τ a: 


4% The ‘fan’ in Fig. 7 was obtained from 
France by Mr. Francis Darwin. It is now in 
the Ethnographical Department of the Fitz- 
william Museum Inv. E. 1903. 309. The shape 
is the same as that depicted by Millet in his 
* Winnower.’ Such fans are still in use to-day in 
Cambridge as basketsand are regularly imported. 
Mr. Darwin’s gardener, who is represented win- 
nowing in Fig. 8, states that the ‘fans’ were in 


use for winnowing when he was a boy, but the art 
of winnowing with them is now only known toa 
fewoldmen. AtSkelwith Fold near Ambleside 
in Cumberland, Mr. Darwin tells me, a basket 
of slightly different shape is still made of thin 
laths of willow and used occasionally as a 
winnower.. A specimen is now in the Fitz- 
william Museum together with the fan in 
Fig. 7. 
x 2 


300 JANE E. HARRISON 


and by no means easy to acquire. The winnower takes as much of grain and 
chaff mixed as he can conveniently hold and supports the basket against the 
knee. He then jerks and shakes the basket so as to propel the chaff towards 
the shallow open end and gradually drives it all out, leaving the grain quite 
clean. The difficult art of the winnower consists in a peculiar knack in 
shaking the basket so as to eject the chaff and keep the grain. The beginner 
usually finds that he inverts the procedure. The wind “plays no part alia 
ever in this process. It can be carried on with success on a perfectly still 


lic. 8.—WINNOWING ‘FAN’ IN Usk. 


day, but it is necessarily a somewhat tedious method and requires a highly 
skilled labourer. 

It has been repeatedly noticed that the characteristic form. of the liknon 
is that it is shovel-shaped, high at one end, low atthe other. This is a foolish 
shape for a fruit-basket, but essential to the process described. The grain 
and chaff can be scooped up in the basket itself, the high back prevents the 
escape of the grain, the low wide open part facilitates the escape of the 
chaff. The handles are convenient though perhaps not quite indispensable. 

__ The process described explains, I think, an illustration used by Aristotle. ἐπ 


© Arist. Metcor., 568", 29. σεισμοῦ γενομένου ἐπιπολάζει πλῆθος λίθων ὥσπερ τῶν ἐν τοῖς χίενοὐ 
ἀνα βραττομένων. 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI, 301 


He says ‘after an earthquake has taken place a number of stones came up to 
the surface like the things that are seethed up in likna.’ 


When the 
winnowing basket is agitated the chaff rises up and sprays over the shallow 
end. Liddell and Scott explain the passage as meaning the ‘scum left in 
sieves, but a liknon is not a sieve, and if it were it would offer no analogy. 
The object of the process is of course the complete elimination and abolition 
of the chaff. It is of this that Clement!’ of Alexandria is thinking when 
he takes the /iknon as a symbol of utter destruction : ‘let us then flee from 
convention .... it chokes a man, it turns him away from truth, it leads him 
away from life, it is a snare, it is a pit, it isa gulf of destruction, it is a liknon, 
an evilthing is convention.’ In Egypt, if we may trust Plutarch,” winnowing 
was actually used as a method of utter destruction. In his discourse On 7818 
and Osiris he says on the authority of Manetho that in the dog days they 
used to burn men alive, whom they called Typhonians, and ‘their ashes they 
made away with by winnowing them and scattering. them asunder.’ Hence 
to Christian writers the fan became the symbol not only of purification, but 
for the ungodly of perdition ; 15 but this symbolism is happily unknown in 
classical times. 


Evidence both literary and monumental has clearly proved that the 
liknon was used as a basket for fruits and as a cradle in classical days. A 
basket of almost precisely the same form is, it has also been shown, used in 
many countries to-day for the purpose of winnowing. There is, therefore, 
practically no doubt that the liknon was actually used as a winnower among 
the Greeks. None the less, however, is it certain that the liknon was not the 
only or perhaps the most frequent implement employed. 

The implement employed in Homeric days, or at least one of the imple- 
ments, was of such a shape that an oar or rudder could be mistaken for it. 
Teiresias in Hades foretells to Odysseus what shall befall him after the 
slaying of the suitors; he is to go his way carrying with him a shapen oar or 
rudder till he comes to a land where men have no knowledge of sea-things, 
and a sign shall then be given to him where he is to abide. Teiresias thus 
instructs him : 

ὁππότε Kev δή τοι ξυμβλήμενος ἄλλος ὁδίτης 
φήῃ ἀθηρηλοιγὸν ἔχειν ἀνὰ φαιδίμῳ one, 
καὶ τότε δὴ γαίῃ πήξας εὐῆρες ἐρετμόν, κ.τ.λ.13 

The word translated ordinarily ‘winnowing-fan’ is not λέκνον but 

ἀθηρηλοιγός ‘chaff-destroyer. Ὁ Such a word, suitable enough to the obscurity 


16. Clem. Al. Protr. xii. 118. φύγωμεν οὖν 
τὴν συνήθειαν... ἄγχει τὸν ἄνθρωπον, τῆς 
ἀληθείας ἀποτρέπει, ἀπάγει τῆς ζωῆς, παγίς 
ἐστιν, βόθρος ἐστίν, βάραθρόν ἐστι, λίκνον ἐστίν. 
᾿ κακὸν ἡ συνήθεια, 

Ἢ Plub. de Is. εἰ Os. 73, 880 Ὁ: ζῶντας 
ἀνθρώπους κατεπίμπρασαν, ὡς Μανεθὼς ἱστόρηκε, 
᾿Τυφωνείους καλοῦντες, καὶ τὴν τέφραν αὐτῶν 
᾿λικμῶντε ᾿ἡφάνιζον καὶ διέσπειρον. 


a whe 


- 18 Luke 3, 17. 


19 Hom. Od. xi. 127. 

20 Sophocles in the <Acanthoplex called the 
winnowing fan &@npéBpwrov ὄργανον. The line 
is preserved by Eustathius ad Od. xi. 128. 

ὥμοις ἀθηρόβρωτον ὄργανον φέρων. 
The variant form makes it doubly clear that the 
name was a fanciful oracular epithet. 


302 JANE E. HARRISON 


of an oracle, is obviously not one in common use; it is too cumbersome for 
daily handling; but none the less the main fact stands out clearly that it was. 
an implement that could be carried over the shoulder, that roughly speaking 
it looked like an oar,2! and hence that it must be a thing perfectly distinct 
from the cradle-basket. 

There was then a form of winnowing-fan similar in shape to an oar 
and oracularly called a ‘chaff-destroyer. What was its ordinary name and 
what do we know of its precise shape and methed of use 7 

As to the shape of the winnower: Eustathius 52. in commenting on the 
word ‘ chaff-destroyer’ says that it is a shovel (πτύον), and he adds that the 
analogy is explained by the fact that both the things compared are also 
called blade, the ‘ oar is the blade of the sea,’ the ‘ shovel the blade of the dry 
land.’ That the ‘ chaff-destroyer’ was a shovel is also expressly stated by the 
Venetian scholiast,?? who says ‘a@nponouyor (sic) with acute accent on the last 
syllable; it means the shovel (πτύον). 

The ‘chaff-destroyer’ then is a form of shovel, Of the use of the shovel 
(πτύον) in winnowing we learn more from another Homeric passage. Hector 
lets fly an arrow against Menelaos, it strikes his corslet and rebounds : 


ws δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἀπὸ πλατέος πτυόφιν μεγάλην κατ᾽ ἀλωὴν 
θρώσκωσιν κύαμοι μελανόχροες ἢ ἐρέβινθοι 
πνοιῇ ὕπο λιγυρῇ καὶ λικμητῆρος ἐρωῇ."" 


Here clearly the shovel (πτύον) is used to toss up the grain against the 
wind; the wind is the natural winnower and man helps it by exposing the 
mixed seeds and husks for the wind to sift. It is a process wholly unlike 
that described in relation to the winnow-basket (Adevov). This comes out 
yet more clearly in another Homeric simile: 


e > ” » ,ὔ ς Ν ᾽ > Ν 

ὡς δ᾽ ἄνεμος ἄχνας φορέει ἱερὰς κατ᾽ ἀλωὰς 

> lal , “ \ , 

ἀνδρῶν λικμώντων, ὅτε Te ξανθὴ Δημήτηρ 

κρίνῃ ἐπειγομένων ἀνέμων καρπόν τε καὶ ἄχνας."5 


Here the winnowing instrument, the πτύον or shovel, is not mentioned 


21 An oar or rudder: the Greek ἐρετμός, Latin 4 Hom. JI. xiii. 588. Eust. ad loc. πτύου δὲ. 


remus, ourrudder all came from the same root. οὐ δι᾽ οὗ γῆν avappimrovow ἀλλὰ λικμητικοῦ 


Oarand rudder seem at first not to have been 
clearly distinguished. See Schrader Real-lexicon 
s.v. ‘Rudern.’ Odysseus with the oar or 
rudder is represented on two gems : see my Myths 
of the Odyssey Pl. 30 a and ὁ. 

23 Eust. ad Od. xi. 128, 1676. 49 ἀθηρηλοιγόν, 
ὅ ἐστι πτύον, λικμητήριον τὸ τῶν ἀθέρων ὀλοθρευ- 
τικόν. 

33. Schol. Ven. ad Od. xi. 128 ἀθηρολοιγὸν 
ὀξυτόνως" δηλοῖ δὲ τὸ πτύον. 
on οἱ δὲ νεώτεροι τὸ κίνητρον τῆς ἀθέρας οἴονται. 
I do not know exactly what he means by a 
κίνητρον, it must be some instrument for shak- 
ing the grain. Possibly of νεώτεροι confused 
the liknon-basket with the shovel. 


The scholiast goes: 


ἀναβάλλοντος τὰ ἠλοημένα τοῦ καὶ eis τύπον. 
ἐσχηματισμένου χειρὸς δακτύλων. .. διὸ τῇ ἐκ τοῦ 
βασιλικοῦ θώρακος ἀποπλανήσει τοῦ ὀϊΐστοῦ ἥτις 
κατὰ τὴν ἐκ τῆς χειρὸς τοῦ Ἑλένου ἄπρακτον 
συνδιανοεῖται βολήν, δόξοι ἂν ὃ ποιητὴς μυκτηρί- 
ζειν ὡς οἷον ἀπὸ ξυλίνης καὶ ὁμωνύμως λεγομένης 
χειρὸς εἰκῆ ἀφειμένου τοῦ βέλους, κιτ.λ. Schol. 
Ven. ad loc. πτυόφιν]. πτύου, πτύον δέ ἐστιν ἐν 
ᾧ τὰ ἠλοημένα γεννήματα ἀναβάλλουσι χωρί- 
Covres τοῦ ἀχύρου... τινὲς τὰ μὲν σιδηρᾶ πτύα, 
τὰ δὲ ξύλινα καὶ τρόπον χειρὸς ἔχοντα οἷς καὶ τὴν 
γῆν μεταβάλλουσι καὶ τοὺς ἀστάχυας ἀναρρίπ- 
τουσι θρίνακάς φασι. Παρὰ δὲ ᾿Αττικοῖς πτύα. 

5. Jl. v. 499. No scholia on this passage are 
extant. mys Hue oa eee 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 303 


but the process is clear. The grain is tossed up, exposed to the air and wind 
as the hay is with us in haymaking; the wind carries the chaff to a distance 
and the heavier grain falls short in a growing heap.” 

The scholia on //iad xiii. 588 are instructive, if at first sight somewhat 
startling. Eustathius after praising the apposite elegance of the simile 
proceeds to explain πτύον. ‘It is not the kind (of shovel) with which they 
throw up earth but a winnowing sort for igre: up threshed grain, and is 
shaped in the form of the fingers of a hand. . Hence the poet seems to be 
sniffing at the glancing of the arrow from “the king’s corslet, conceived as 
importing the ineffective discharge from the hand of Helenos, as though the 
shaft were sent at random from a wooden hand that bore the like name.’ 

Eustathius, it is quite clear, holds that the ptyon is in shape like a hand, 
though in his desire to emphasize the hand he confuses the metaphor. 
Homer is thinking of the swift vain glancing of the arrow from the corslet ; 
he says and cares nothing for the shape of the 
thing from which it glances; but the over-subtlety _ 
of Eustathius is of great use to us, as it emphasizes 
the fact that he believed the ptyon to be hand- 
shaped. 

The Venetian scholiast confirms Eustathius, 
and adds a useful clue. He says a ptyon is ‘that 
in which they threw, up products of the threshing 
floor, clearing them from chaff.’ So far we should 
think that by a ptyon was meant an ordinary Η 
shovel in which the grain was thrown. But his E199. 205 
next remark shows that the ἐν, in, means rather 
by than strictly in. ‘Some call those made of 
iron ptya, but those made of wood and having the 
shape of a hand and with-which they turn over 
earth®> and throw up stalks of grain they call 
thrinakes. But in Attica they are called ptya.’ 

Ordinary implements were in Homer’s days 
not made of iron, so we may dismiss the iron πτύον 
' from the question. A thrinax, we. a trident, or 
thing with three prongs, has some faint resem- 
blance to the fingers of a hand, but a thrinax as — Fic. 9.—Creran θυρνάκι. 
we understand it, ¢.c. a three-pronged fork, does 
not commend itself as the ideal winnower. Excellent for haymaking, it 
would obviously allow mixed chaff and grain to slip through before it was 
tossed against the wind. : 


repesspreiss 3 


2a ἀμ, is very clearly explained in to the δ’ οὗ γὴν ἀναρρίπτουσι and must have 
Xenophon’s Oeconomicus xviii, but Xenophon belonged to σιδηρᾶς, To this day in Greece πτύα 
does not name the implement used. _ (i.c. φτυάρια) are used only for moving earth 
ἢ 30 Mr. Bosanquet points out that thie words already dug and there is no such thing as a 
ἴ. “the Yuet μάμ μα most τι, adheced spade driven in with the foot. . 
4 


304 JANE ἘΞ HARRISON 


Happily the difficulty, which from classical evidence alone would be 
well-nigh insuperable, is instantly solved by the witness of the winnowing 
implement in use to-day in Crete and elsewhere in Greece. In Fig. 9 we 
have a thrinaz, and a glance at the illustration will show that it is neither 
fork nor shovel, but an ingenious blend of both. The specimen” from which 
the drawing is made was bought by Mr. Bosanquet at Khandra, and is now 
in the Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge. Mr. Bosanquet kindly tells me 
the name by which the instrument is now called was written down for him 
by his Greek foreman, who spells phonetically, as θυρνάκι. As pronounced 
by the Greek θυρνάκι is absolutely indistinguishable from θιρνάκι which is 
therefore probably the form that would be given by the educated. @:pydxe is 
of course θιρνάκιον, the diminutive of O/pvaE = Opiva—. The fondness of 
modern Greek for diminutives is well known. The operation in which the 
θυρνάκι is used is known as λέχνισμα not λέκνισμα. I asked Mr. Bosanquet 
to ascertain whether the θιρνάκι was ever called a πτύον, and he writes ‘It 
might be called φτυώρι very easily, that being the common word for a shovel. 
I induced the Cretan to explain the shape of θιρνάκι thus, ‘ εἶνε ὡς εἶδος 
φτυάρι᾽ ‘it is something like a shovel.’ 77 

It may be objected that the θυρνάκι of Crete is falsely so-called, as 
it has five, not three, prongs. An old gloss* tells us that the same laxity 
in terminology prevailed in the case of the ancient θρῖναξ. The Opivaé 
was strictly of course the trident, as of Poseidon, but it was also ‘an agri- 
cultural implement also called a likmétérion, since it was trident-shaped 
and as it were three-nailed, or, the gloss adds significantly, ‘it was a corn 
shovel, with teeth, and was also called five-fingered: the which is a 
likmetérion. Wooden trinakcs, a writer in the Anthology ?® says, are the 
‘hands of field labourers, and the five-pronged thrinaw or trinax would 
of course present tlie closest analogy. 

In fact so well established was the five-pronged form of the winnowing 
implement that Eustathius uses it as an illustration to explain other five- 


pronged instruments. 


Thus in commenting on the passage in the Iliad * 


36 Now in the Anthropological Department of 
the Fitzwilliam Museum. My grateful thanks 
are due to the Director, Biron Anatole von 
Hiigel, for his kin permission to publish the 
θυρνάκι and to Miss Edith Crum for the accur- 
ate drawing reproduced in Fig. 9. 

7 Since the above was written Mr. Bosanquet 
kindly tells me that not only in Crete but quite 
recently he has seen at Sicyon the process of 
winnowing with the θυρνάκι. The forks there 
used were of two types: the home-made, 
usually 3-pronged, cut from a tree with twigs 
in that form, and the shop-made, usually a 
4-pronged spade, and very ‘hand-like,’ cut 
from a plank. 

38 Cyr. gl. Vind. 171 Opivak: σκεῦος γεωργικὸν 
ὃ καὶ λέγεται λικμητήριον: ἐπειδὴ τριαινοειδής 
ἐστι καὶ οἱονεὶ τριόνυξ, ἢ πτύον τοῦ σίτου ἔχον 


ὄδυντας πέντε ὃ καὶ λέγουσι πεντεδάκτυλον, ὅ 
ἐστι λικμητήριον. Hesychius defines θρῖναξ as 
πτύον σίτου ἢ τρίαινα. The scholiast on Nican- 
dros Theriaka 114 says: θρῖναξ' γεωργικόν τί 
ἐστι σκεῦος ἔχον τρεῖς ἐξοχὰς καὶ σκόλοπας 
ἀπωξυμμένας ᾧ τὰς στάχυας τρίβουσι καὶ λικμῶσι 
καὶ ἀπαχυρίζουσι. : 
39. Anth. Pal. vi. 104 
kal τρίνακας ξυλίνας χεῖρας ἀρουροπόνων. 
Such a ‘ fan’ Mr. Bernard Darwin kindly 
reminds me, points a comparison in the ‘ Arabian 
Nights.’ In the ‘Story of the Seéond Royal 
Mendicant,’ Jarjarees appears ‘ina most hideous 
shape with hands like winnowing forks.’ 
30 Ti. i, 463 νέσι δὲ παρ᾽ αὐτὸν “ἔχον πεμπώ- 
Boda χερσίν. Eustath. ad loc. φασὶν of παλαιοὶ 
ὡς of μὲν ἄλλοι τρισὶν ἔπειρον ὀβελοῖς, of 
λέγοιντο ἂν τριώβολα: μόνοι δὲ of Κυμαῖοι, 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 305 


when at a banquet following after sacrifice Homer says: ‘And by his side 
the young men were holding five-pronged forks’; he says: ‘according to 
the ancients other people used three prongs for spitting which might be 
called triobola. The Cumaeans alone who were of olic race used pempo- 
bola; the word pempobolon is Molic like the usage . . . . and this pempobolon 
in use among the Cumaeans resembles the fingers of a winnowing shovel 
or the teeth of a trident.’ 

The Cretan θυρνάκε looks to our modern eyes like a spade. But 
the spade, familiar though it is to us, is not, it would seem, a very primitive 
implement. A wooden spade will not penetrate hard earth. Until 
iron comes into general use, and even after with a people who work unshod, 
the ordinary method of digging is to break up the earth with a pick and 
then if need be shovel it away with a shovel. Our wooden spade is a com- 
bination of pick and shovel in one, but a wooden spade like the Cretan 
θυρνάκι is a shovel only, of no possible use for digging. For winnowing, 
however, it is an admirable instrument; the prongs help to penetrate into 
and pick up the mixed mass of stalks and grain, and the broad curved 
surface is an excellent shovel. 

It is then I think abundantly clear that Eustathius believed the 
ptyon of Homer to be an instrument with either three or five prongs, and 
that this instrument was substantially the same as the Cretan θυρνάκι. 
We are so accustomed to associate the trident with the sea that it is 
a mental effort to transport it inland. Hesychius*! knew of the two 
uses; he defines thrinas: as ‘the ptyon of grain or the trident.’ Whether 
the actual implement confused by the landsman with an oar had teeth® 
like the Cretan θυρνάκε or was a simpler form of shovel*® with a long 
handle, it is of course impossible to determine, nor is it for the present 
discussion a matter of great importance. 


It has been seen that the liknon was ‘set up’ in the service of Athena 
goddess of tilth. The ptyon in like fashion was erected at harvest 
festivals, perhaps in token that the work was ended,.** Theocritus at the 


Αἰολικὸν δὲ οὗτοι ἔθνος, πεμπωβόλοις ἐχρῶντο. 
ἔστι δὲ ἡ τοῦ πεμπωβόλου λέξις Αἰολική, καθὰ 
καὶ ἡ χρῆσις... ἔοικε δὲ τὸ παρὰ τοῖς Κυμαίοις 
τοῦτο πεμπώβολον δακτύλοις πτύου λικμητικοῦ 
ἢ ὀδοῦσι τριαίνης. 

31. Hesych. s.v. θρῖναξ' πτύον σίτου ἣ τρίαινα. 
In the Attic dialect the πτύον was called πτέον. 
See Eustath. ad 111. xiii. 588, 948. 19. 

8 It has been suggested by Mr. R. C. Bosan- 
quet (J.H.S. 1902, p. 389) that the trident 
implements carried by the procession of men in 
the remarkable steatite vase found at Hagia 
Triada near Phaestos are θυρνάκια, and that 
the whole scene depicted is a Harvest Home. 

rs Sig. Savignoni who published the vase (Moni- 

"enti dei Lincei, 1908, Tav. I) believes the 

_ implement to be a weapon of war. After com- 


paring the implements on the vase with the 
Palestine winnow-fork figured by Hastings 
(Dict. of the Bible, s.v. Agriculture) I believe 
Mr. Bosanquet’s conjecture to be correct. In 
this case the supposed ‘axes’ tied to the ‘ win- 
now-forks’ must be some form of sickle. I 
propose to return to this question at a later 
date, after examining extant forms of pre- 


historic sickles. 


33 A shovel with leaf-shaped blade and long 
handle is, Prof. Ridgeway kindly tells me, still 
to be seen in Ireland. A similar instrument is 
held over the shoulder of the winnower in one 
of the panels that decorate Pisano’s fountain at 
Perugia. 

38a Since the above was written Mr. Bosan- 
quet has kindly sent me an account of win- 


306 


JANE E. HARRISON 


close of his harvest Idyll, in which the festival of Demeter, the Haloa, has 


been described, prays 


ἃς ἐκὶ σωρῷ 
ΣΎ,» \ , 
αὖθις ἐγὼ πάξαιμι μέγα πτύον a δὲ γελάξαι, 
δράγματα καὶ μάκωνας ἐν ἀμφοτέραισιν ἔχοισα .3" 


Here the word usually rendered ‘ fan’ is πτύον. 


The verb used for the 


operation of fixing or planting it is πήγνυμι; the word used for setting 


up the liknon was it will be remembered ἱστάναι. 


The scholiast explains : 


‘when they winnow and heap the grain up, they plant the ptyon in the 


middle, and deposit the thrinaa. 
Triptolemus.’ 
setting up of the oar of Odysseus. 


The reason he (Sophocles) explains in the 
The verb πήγνυμι it will be remembered was used of the 


The liknon, it has been seen, was made of wicker-work, the ptyon 


of wood, and later of iron. 
one tells of 


In a fragment of the Proteus of Aischylus some 


/ 
Σιτουμένην δύστηνον ἀθλίαν φάβα, 
μέσακτα πλευρὰ πρὸς πτύοις πεπλεγμένην.35 


The liknon would be no danger even to a dove, but ἃ bird rashly feeding 
might easily be caught and crippled by such an instrument as the Cretan 


θυρνάκι. 


The ¢thrinax we may then take it was a form of ptyon; but all forms of 


the ptyon wére assuredly not thrinakes. 


The word ptyon 3° could be used of 


any instrument used to ‘ throw off,’ to cast away impurities. The root of ptyon 


is probably onomatopoeic like our ‘spit.’ : 
But the shovel, though it took its name from this 
function of ‘ throwing off,” had other uses. 


form for this purpose. 


nowing as it takes place to-day in Teneriffe. 
The account, vouched:for by Mr. Holford 
Bosanquet, F.R.S., is of special interest as 
showing that the planting of the ptyon is a 
custom still maintained in modern times and 
also because in Teneriffe, it appears, three forms 
of winnowing implements substantially identi- 
eal with the @pivagt the πτύον and the λίκνον are 
still employed. The process is described as 
follows. 1. Threshing takes place on a circular 
floor partly by hoofs of freshly shod ponies or 
of oxen, partly by a sledge studded with sharp 
stones—the straw is turned over with a wooden 
3-pronged fork cut from twigs in that form. 
2. Winnowing is performed with a prongless 
wooden spade. Thus where the Greck has one 
implement, the @pivat, the. inhabitant. of 
Teneriffe has two, the prongless πτύον for actual 
winnowing and the true @pivat for turning over 
and heaping together the masses of straw and 
grain over which the sledge or the line of 
horses go round and round. “8, On finishing 


The shovel-shape was a convenient 


It was used asa grain measure. 


his task with the prongless spade (πτύον) the’ 
winnower plants it in the centre of the heap of 
grain as ὦ sign that his task is done. About 
this time or a little earlier the women set to 
work on the mixture of the grain and chaff 
which lies beside the main heap. They 
winnow the dregs of the threshing-floor in a 
basket which is to all intents and purposes a 
λίκνον except that it‘has no open side. The 
worker gives a rotatory motion to the contents 
and as they move round and round the differ- 
ence of weight separates the chaff, etc., which 
are then thrown out by the hand. 

- 4 Theocr. Jd. vii. 155. Schol. ὅταν δὲ λικ- 
μῶνται καὶ σωρεύωσι ᾿τὸν “πυρὸν. κατὰ μέσον 
πηγνύουσι τὰ πτύον καὶ τὴν θρινάκην. spethete τον 
Τὴν δὲ αἰτίαν εἶπεν ἐκ’ Τριπτολέμου, Ὑ ὁ 

35. Aesch. fry. 194 (ap: Athen. ix. 894a). ~~ 
. 86 Etym. Mag. s.v. rriov. παρὰ once τὸ 
ἀποπτύον καὶ ἀπορρίπτον τῶν καρπῶν τὰ ἄχυρα. 
τὸ δὲ πτύω σημαίνει τὸ. ἀπορρίπτειν, καὶ a 
Aew, ἔνθεν. καὶ τὸ ἀποπτύω. © 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 307 


Hesychius 57 in explaining the word diptyon says: the Cyprians give this name 

to a measure, others say it is half a medimnus. Obviously the Cyprian 

measure was twice the contents of a standard ptyon, a scoop or shovel; 
᾿ whereas ἃ ¢hrinaxz could never have been used as a measure. 

The two instruments thrinuz and ptyon are separately mentioned in the 
list of agricultural implements in the Edict of Diocletian.* The ptoion, 
obviously the same as the earliest form ptyon, costs 12 denarii, the thrinax 
only 8. Both prices are so low that presumably both implements were of 
wood.,*? 

Bearing in mind that the ptyon is a scoop or-shovel like its modern 
descendant the φτυάρι, it is easy for us'to see how it might be confused by 
lexicographers with the liknon-basket. The liknon indeed, if we may trust 
the Etymologicum Magnum, was called a ptyarion,” i.e. a small ptyon. ‘ The 
ancients, the lexicographer adds, ‘made the sons of their house sleep in 
ptyaria for the sake of fertility. The wooden corn-scoop, like the wicker 
winnowing basket, would be quite suitable for a cradle. 

Although the liknon might easily be called ptyarion from its shovel-shape, 
the cardinal distinction between the processes of winnowing by the two 
implements, the /iknon and the ptyon, remains. With a plyon you throw grain 
and chaff together into the air and they are separated either by the wind or 
by their own specific gravity. With a likaon you shake the mixture in the 
vessel itself; the chaff gradually escapes but the grain remains in the liknon. 
The processes have nothing in common except that they both seem to purify 
corn. The operation of throwing the grain is naturally best performed witha 
long-handled implement like the thrinax, the operation of shaking it needs 
either two handles or none at all. As regards the advantages of the two 
processes it is clear that the throwing of the grain is a more rough and ready, 
and much more rapid process, the shaking operation is tedious but thorough, 
If stalks have been left with the grain, the throwing operation is the only one 
practicable, 

Besides these two methods of winnowing, the throwing and the shaking 
carried on respectively with the ptyon and the liknon, there remains a third 


le ei Ae 
i 


37 Hesych. 8,0, δίπτυον. Κύπριοι μέτρον. of δὲ 
τὸ ἡμιμέδιμνον. In late Latin vannus is also a 
measure ; see Ducange 8.0, 

38 J.H.S. xi. 1890 p. 309. In the Edict the 
word AnAdBpa is given as the equivalent of 
‘wroiov.” Δηλάβρα is obviously the Latin 


dulabra. This looks as if the πτοῖον of the - 


inscription were more like the @ptvat than an 
ordinary scoop ; but clearly the two are distin- 
guished, 

139 In Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible, s.v. 
Agriculture, two instruments are figured and 
said to be in use in Syria, which correspond 
very closely to the πτύον and Opivat. One of 


_ them is a fork with four prongs, the other a 


shovel with a long handle. These two instru- 


ments are said to correspond to the two Hebrew 
words translated in our version of the Bible by 
fan and shovel ; Isaiah xxx. 24, ‘clean provender 
which hath been winuowed with the shovel and 
with the fan.’ Unfortunately the Dictionary 
does not state any facts as to the provenance of 
the implements figured. Vogelstein, Lands- 
wirthschaft in Paiestin,. p. 68, states that in 
Palestine a fork with three prongs is used for 
a preliminary single tossing, then a. fork with 
seven prongs, and then ἃ still finer implement ; 
the final purification is effected by a sieve as in 
modern Greece. 

4 Etym. Mag. Acixvoy σημαίνει τὸ wrudpiov.. . 
καὶ γὰρ of ἀρχαῖοι ἐν τοῖς πτυαρίοις ἐποίουν τοὺς 
οἰκείους υἱοὺς καθεύδειν, διὰ 7d πολύγονον. 


308 _ JANE E. HARRISON 


method, that of cleansing through a sieve, 1.6. a vessel the bottom of which 
is pierced by holes. Servius, it will be remembered, defined the iknon as a 
cribrum areale, a ‘sieve of the threshing floor. In the Edict of Diocletian 
already referred to (p. 307) there is a separate heading ‘ concerning sieves,’ 
Sieves are regarded as quite distinct from the ‘ ptoion’ and ‘thrinaxz. Among 
the various sieves one is called ‘a sieve of the threshing floor made of hide,’ 
and we learn to our surprise that it cost 250 denarii. The passing through a 
sieve was of course a more delicate process than the tossing up with the 
ptyon. Mr. Bosanquet kindly tells me that in Greece to-day, after the mixed 
_ grain and chaff has been winnowed by the men with the θυρνάκι, the women 
further cleanse it by passing it through a sieve. The sieve appears to be a 
very peculiar implement. In the stone-age pierced jars were used for 
sifting. The bottom of the sieve of modern Greece is not infrequently a 
pierced petroleum tin. The koskinon or round sieve is, Mr. Bosanquet says 
in use in every modern cottage and—an interesting point—it is used as a 
vessel for carrying as well as for sifting. At a modern Greek inn the feed 
of oats for your horse is often brought and rattled about before you in a 
koskinon to show that it is all good grain, no chaff; whereas, as Mr. Bosan- 
quet reminds me, in an English stable corn is brought from the bin to the 
manger in a wooden tray with sloping sides open at one end, a vessel oddly 
like a liknon. <A ‘fan’ of this tray-shape is, Dr. Haddon kindly tells me, 
used for winnowing by the agricultural peoples of the East Indian 
Archipelago. - 

The real distinction between liknon and sieve, a distinction overlooked 
by Servius, is that the liknon is open at one side. This is an impossible 
shape for a sieve, as the grain when rattled would fly out, but it is clear that 
either could be used to carry firstfruits. lence the confusion of Servius, 

The modern Greek uses then the θυρνάκι, a special form of ptyon, to throw 
his grain ; he uses also the koskinon to cleanse it more completely. Of the use 
of the liknon, Mr. Bosanquet again kindly tells me, he can find no trace. It is 
indeed rare to find all three varieties of winnowing implements in use in 
one country. The only country known to me in which all three exist, 
though in different districts, is Finland.*! 

For more convenient comparison the winnowing implements of Finland 
are collected together in one illustration (Fig. 10). 

In the right hand bottom corner of Fig. 10 is the winnow shovel used 
throughout Finland for the preliminary tossing of the grain. The shovel 
here Sgured is of wood ; its blade is 28 cm. long, its handle 14cm. The 
shovel was in use in the province of Savolak and is now in the Museum of 
the Institute at Mustiala. 

The sieve immediately above the shovel is from the parish of Jorvis 
also in the province of Savolak. After the grain has been tossed and piled 


* The particulars as.to Finnish methods of make use of them. ‘Three of the illustrations 
winnowing and the drawings reproduced in are figured in Prof. Grotenfelt’s book on Fin- — 
Fig. 10 were sent to Mr. Darwin by Prof. nish primitive methods of agriculture: Det 
Grotenfelt, who most kindly allows me to primitiva Yordbrukets Metoder i Finland. 


, 


aa 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 309 


ina heap, a woman takes a sieve, places herself in the doorway, where there 
is a considerable draught, and shakes the sieve with some violence. The 
seeds of weeds, etc., fall through the sieve and the dust is blown away. 
Pieces of stalk, husks, lumps of earth and the like collect on the top of the 
grain, and the woman picks them off. 

In West Finland this secondary purification is performed not by a sieve 
but by the vessel reproduced at the top of Fig. 10, obviously the same in 
formas the Greek liknon. The specimen here figured came from the parish of 
Sibbo in the province of Nyland and is now in the ethnographical Museum of 


Fic. 10.—WINNOWING IMPLEMENTS IN USE IN FINLAND. 


Helsingfors. It is 009 inches long by 0°6 broad by 0°15 high. The bottom 
is ordinarily made of birch-bark, and the sides of aspen. The front, as shown 
in Fig. 10, hangs forward, the back is vertical. It is furnished with handles 
at the side like the liknon. A woman takes the vessel, fills it with grain, 
and shakes it; the dust ‘s blown away, and bits of straw and husks, etc., 
slide off over the front edge. In some parishes the grain is emptied from 
this vessel into a sieve, to be purified. 

Here it is seen very clearly that for sieve and Jiknon alike the operation 
is one of shaking, but the method of escape of the impurities is different. 


These Finnish methods of winnowing, combining as they do all three 
implements, the ptyon or shovel, the liinon or basket, the koskinon or sieve, 
enable us to understand the confusion of all three by the lexicographers ; and 


_Suidas is no longer obscure, though certainly inaccurate, when he says : 


Liknon, a koskinon or a ptyon. 


310 JANE E. HARRISON 


All three are different forms of an implement for one purpose, 7.6. 
winnowing. 


Fortified by a fairly complete understanding of the form and use of the 
liknon we are able to return to Servius and the vannus. The Latins had 
like the Greeks three main different forms of winnower, and these were the 
ventilabrum, the equivalent of the ptyon or spade-shovel; the vannus, the 
equivalent of the /iknon or basket-winnower ; and the crbrum, the equine 
of the koskinon or sieve. 

About the cribrum,*? the discerner or sieve, there is no difficulty. As to 
the first and second, the vannus and ventilabrum, a word must be said. 

First, the vannus and the ventilabrum are distinguished by Latin writers 
as separate implements. Varro * in his discussion of agricultural matters 
writes of the process of winnowing thus: ‘the ears having been threshed, it 
is needful to throw them up into the air with valli or ventilabra when there 
is a gentle wind .... This is done that the lightest part of them, that which 
is called chaff, may be fanned away beyond the threshing floor, and the 
grain which is heavy may come pure to the basket.’ The word vallus is of | 
course vannulus, the diminution of vannus. All that we learn from this . 
passage of Varro is that there were two implements, the vallus or vannulus 
and the ventilabrum. Elsewhere he says valli were made of wicker-work.# 
Columella is more explicit. After stating that the west wind is the best for 
winnowing he adds that to wait for that wind is the sign of a slothful 
husbandman, and concludes: ‘If for several days the wind be low in all 
quarters let the corn be cleaned by vans, lest after an ominous calm a furious . 
storm destroy the labours of the whole year. 5. Here clearly the vannus is the 
implement to be used when there is no wind, the ventilabrum, as indeed its 
name would suggest, is the implement for utilizing the wind, .6. a ptyon or 
thrinax. We have already seen that the liknon is independent of the wind, 
and we may therefore conclude that Servius is right in his identification 
of liknon and vannus. 


Throughout the present discussion, especially in translating quotations 
from poets, the word ‘fan’ has been freely used. It is necessary now to 
enquire what precisely is meant in English by a ‘ fan.’ ᾿. 
42 The word cribrum, ,/skar, kar, means of perforated. 
course nothing but ‘divider,’ ‘separator’; and 43 Varr. RR. i, 52. 2. iis (80. spicis) tritis, 


similarly the Greek κόσκινον, κο-σκι-νο-ν is only 
a reduplicated form of ,/sak, ska, to divide, 
to separate. Hence a liknon might ety- 
mologically be called a koskinon, since both are 
dividers. But the Latin eribrum and Greek 
κόσκινον were early specialized off to mean 
implements that divided by means of a per- 
forated surface. Possibly the expression 
κόσκινον τετρημένον (Plato Gorgias 493 B) points 
to a time when the koskinon was not necessarily 


oportet e terra subjactari vallis aut ventilabris, 
cum ventus spirat lenis, Ita fit, ut quod 
levissimum est in eo atque appellatur acus 
evannatur foras extra arcam, ac frumentum 
quod est ponderosum purum veniat ad corbem. 

44 Varro R.R, i, 23. 5, valli ex viminibus., 

4 Colum. ii. 21. at si compluribus diebus 
undique sibilat aura vannis expurgentur ne 
post nimiam segnitiem vasta tempestas irritum 
faciat totius anni laborem. 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 311 
᾿ Most educated persons now-a-days, provided they are neither farmers nor 


} antiquaries, if asked what a ‘fan’ is, would answer: ‘an instrument with 


which to cause wind, to ventilate.’ They would also, if acquainted with the 
Bible, add that in ancient days it was the name given to an instrument used 
in winnowing : ‘ His fan is in his hand and he will throughly purge his floor,’ “ 
If they are classical scholars they will without compunction translate λίκνον 
and πτύον by the same word ‘ fan,’ without reflecting that an instrument that 
resembles an oar is scarcely likely to have been a convenient cradle for a child. 
The word ‘ fan’ in English covers and conceals a two-fold ambiguity ; it is the 
common name for a ventilator, with no sense of winnowing; it further is 
the name applied indifferently to any and every form of implement used in 
winnowing. 

The German language has two distinct words for the two distinct win- 
nowing instruments,’ and thus avoids much confusion. Schwinge or Getreide- 
Schwinge is the word for the liknon-basket. Schauwfel or Worfschaufel for the 
ptyon or shovel. According to Dr. Schmidt,’ in Lithuanian the two processes 
are expressed by two words near akin, but from the beginning distinct, nékdpi, 
which means to clean by shaking, léksha, to clean by throwing. 

It is unnecessary to dwell on the modern use of the word ‘fan’ for an 
instrument with which to cause wind; it lent a metaphor to Milton,‘ who 
tells how Raphael - 


‘ Winnows the buxom air.’ 


And again in the Endymion of Keats 
‘to fan 


And winnow from the coming step of time 
All chaff of custom.’ 


These passages are worth noting because instinctively each poet adds 
the word winnow, as though without it the metaphor might not be clearly 
intelligible; the word ‘fan’ is passing away, at least in literature, from the 
domain of agriculture. 

In Fig. 10 we have left unexplained the fourth instrument on the left. 
It completes the series of winnowers. The specimen figured is in the 
Ethnological Museum at Helsingfors and comes from the parish of Sibbe in 


_ the province of Nyland. It is not a shovel but a ‘fan’ in the modern 


English sense, a sort of hand-broom made of birch-bark. In England also, 
before the introduction of Painewing- machines, a rude instrument made of 
sacking stretched on a frame was used to ‘raise wind,’ and was called a 
Barn-fan. | 
It is more important for our purpose to note that the word fan or, as it 
was often spelt, van was used to denote a large shallow wicker basket with 
handles used for cleaning corn by shaking, and practically the same as the 
basket i in rie 3. Chaucer says of one of his characters he ‘strouted as a 


#8 Schmidt, Sacisdalahiart Ρ. 108. 
49 Milton, 7.1. v. 270. 


312 JANE E. HARRISON 


fanne large and brode.’ Trapp®? in his commentary on Psalm xviii. 8 
(1654) says ‘chaff will get to the top of the Fan while good Corn lieth at 
the bottom.’ This clearly shows that the process of winnowing of which.the 
commentator is thinking is that described above (p. 300). 

Happily as regards the shape of the English ‘van’ in the 14th century 
we are not left to the vague witness of litera- 
ture ; we have monumental evidence. The Church 
of Chartham contains a memorial brass (Fig. 11) ™ 
to Sir Robert son of Sir Robert de Setvans. The 
date is about 1306. On the knight’s surcoat, 
ailettes, and shield are emblazoned the family 
arms, the seven fans. Schematised as they are 
for heraldic purposes it is quite clear that the 
‘fans’ are wicker baskets with handles, with 
one side open, like the ‘ fan’ in Fig. 7. 

In closing this portion of my discussion of 
the shape and form of the vannus I should like 
to make a practical suggestion. The word ‘ fan’ 
is a beautiful word of almost magical associations, 
and in poetry must and will always hold its 
own, since in poetry the atmosphere of the word 
is of far greater importance than its precise 
scientific association. But in prose and for pur- 
poses of exact construing, its use as a uniform 
rendering for vannus, ventilabrum, λίκνον and 
πτύον is misleading, and has already caused 
abundant confusion. If some general word is 
essential I would suggest that ‘van’ be employed ; 
its slight archaism arrests attention and the mis- 
leading modern connotation is avoided. Some 
further precision might however be with advant- 
age attempted. Could not vannus and liknon 
be rendered by winnow-corb? The archaism of cord is unobjectionable, since 
the instrument described is all but obsolete. The words πτύον and ventilabrum 
might be rendered in prose winnow-shovel, in poetry ‘van.’ The word θρῖναξ 
remains, and is perhaps best rendered winnow-fork ; though this is not quite 
satisfactory because the Opiva€ is half-shovel, lalf-fork. 


(From Boutell’s Monumental 
Brasses, p. 35.) 


59 This quotation and some of those above I 
owe to the English Dialect Dictionary. The 
description there given of the operation of 
winnowing in a _ basket-fan is as follows. 
‘Originally it was used to separate the chaff 
from the wheat by tossing it up into the air and 
catching it as it fell down, thus allowing the 
wind to fan out the chaff.’ This description 
reads as though it had been invented on ὦ 
priort grounds; the actual operation as des- 


cribed on p. 300 is one of shaking not tossing ; 
the grain never leaves the fan, nor is the wind 
necessarily utilized. The Dictionary further 


states that the word ‘ fan’ as meaning a basket- 


or shovel-winnower is obsolete except 
historically. As already stated the word and 
the implement are familiar to old people to-day. 

51 Routell Menumental Brasses p. 35. My 
attention was called to this interesting 
monument by Professor Bendall. 


Σ 
Γ 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI 313 


pm 


Now that the exact nature of the ‘fan,’ its uses and various shapes have 
been determined, we are able to pass to the second division of our discussion. 


2.— The precise sense in which the ‘fan’ is called ‘ mystic.’ 


The ‘ mystic’ character of the ‘ fan’ is a fact, not merely the vague fancy 
of a Latin poet. Harpocration in discussing the liknon says that it was 
‘serviceable for every rite and sacrifice.’ The word translated ‘rite’ (τελετή) 
always implies a mystic ceremony of initiation, as contrasted with a mere 
ceremony of sacrifice (θυσία). 

At the outset it should be noted that the only form of winnowing-fan 
used in mysteries was the liknon. The ptyon and the thrinaw might be, and 
were ‘planted’ at harvest festivals, but not even an Orphic attempted to 
mysticize the shovel or the fork: it was about the liknon only that mystic 
associations gathered. 

It is necessary at this point to say a word as to what the Greeks meant 
by a‘ mystery.’ I have shown elsewhere * in detail and can only here briefly 
restate what I believe to be the essential factors of ancient mystery rites. 
They are two: 

(a) The seeing, handling, and sometimes tasting of certain sacred objects. 

(Ὁ) Ceremonies of purification, after which, and only after which, these 
sacred objects could be safely seen, handled, or tasted. 

The liknophoria belongs to the class of purification ceremonies. 


eS οϑ8υἧ8Σ)ια ψνυ ΗΝ 


τβακικακλεδαμερεας 


“ὡς nae 
sn ΤΡΣ ας 


“ 


a ΨΥ ἂν 


Fic, 12.--- ΤῊΣ Liknon 1x vse ΙΝ Exeustytan ΜΥΒΤΈΝΙΕΒ, (From a Cinerary Urn at Rome.) 


Fortunately this is no matter of mere conjecture; we have monumental 
evidence. The design in Fig. 12 is part of the decoration of a cinerary urn 


© Harpoorat, 8.V. λικνοφόροΞ' Td λίκνον πρὸς Religion, p- 153. I have here ‘sought to 
πᾶσαν τελετὴν καὶ θυσίαν ἐπιτήδειόν ἐστιν. establish that the word μυστήρια is connected 
Study of Greek aie! with μύσος than with μύω. 
D5 


314 ΤΑΝΕ E. HARRISON 


found in a grave on the Esquiline Hill and now in the Museo delle Terme at 
Rome.** The scenes represented are clearly rites of initiation. On one 
portion of the urn (not figured here) we have a representation of the final stage 
of initiation ; the mystic is admitted to the presence of the goddess herself, 
Demeter, and handles her sacred snake. The remainder of the design (Fig. 12) 
shows two scenes of preliminary purification: (1) the familar sacrifice of the 
‘mystic’ pig ὅδ; (2) purification by the liknon. It is on this last that 
attention must be focussed. 

The candidate is seated on a low seat; he holds a torch, also for puri- 
fication, in his left hand; he rests his right foot on a ram’s head, obviously 
part of the ‘ fleece of purification’; his head is veiled, and over his head a 
priest holds the /iknon. What is contained in the /iknon it is not possible to 
say with certainty. It does not I think contain fruits. When the artist 
wishes to show fruits in a sacred vessel he is quite able to do so, as is seen in 
the dish of poppy-heads held by the priest to the right, where perspective is 
violated to make the meaning clearer. Moreover fruits do not symbolize puri- 
fication, and therefore cannot magically induce it. The liknon is I think 
either empty or holds a little grain and chaff. Anyhow it is clearly part of 
the apparatus of purification. 

The symbolism of the liknon is simple and very beautiful, and it should 
not be hard for us to realize its ritual significance. The Anglican Church 
still prays in her Baptismal Service that water may be sanctified ‘to the 
mystical washing away of sin. She believes that in some mysterious way the 
water is not only the symbol of purification but its actual vehicle. The Greek 
believed that the ‘ fan’ which physically purified grain had power mystically 
to purge humanity. 

This doctrine Servius © states quite clearly. Virgil, he says, calls the 
vannus mystic ‘because the rites of Father Liber had reference to the puri- 
fication of the soul, and men are purified in his mysteries’as grain is purified 
by fans.’ 

The first element then in’ the mysticism of the ‘fan’ is ‘mystical puri- 
fication’; the second, next to be considered, is the ‘ magical promotion of 
Sertility. 

Mystical purification might have been, though it apparently never was, 
effected just as well by the piyon or the thrinax as by the liknon. A winnow- 
shovel or fork held over the head would have induced sympathetic magic 
equally with a winnow-basket. But when we come to the magical induction 
of fertility, the basket that can contain fruits is essential, the fork or shovel 
that merely tosses and shakes them is not enough. The fact that only the 
liknon, never the ptyon or thrinaz, was mysticized makes us suspect that 
the mysticism grew up primarily in relation to the symbolism of fertility 
rather than of purification. 


54 Helbig, Cat. 1168, First published and  Proleyomena to the Study of Greck Religion 
discussed by Mme. Ersilia Cactani-Lovatelli, Chap. x. p. 547. ; 
Ant. Mon. Ined. p. 25 ff. Τὰν. ii-iv. I have 55 See Prolegomena, p. 152. : 
discussed this monument in detail in my 56 Joc. cit , see p. 292. 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 315 


The liknon, we have seen (p. 294), served asacradle. About this simple 
use a primitive mysticism of the ‘sympathetic magic’ kind speedily and 
naturally grew up. The Scholiast on Callimachus ™ in explaining the liknon- 
cradle of Zeus says: ‘in old days they used to put babies to sleep in winnow- 
baskets as an omen for wealth and fruits. The child was placed in the 
winnow-basket or sieve ὅ8 for luck, and the luck was probably regarded as 
mutual. The fruitful basket heiped the child, the child helped the fruitful- 
ness of the basket. 

The placing of the child in the liknon at birth was probably rather a 
casual custom than arite. But the carrying of the liknon full of fruits was 
a regular part of the ceremonial of marriage. The author of the ‘ Proverbial 


Fic. 13.—Carryine or Likna aT MARRIAGE PROCESSION. 


Sayings of Alexander’ °° says ‘it was the custom at Athens at weddings that 
a boy, both of whose parents were alive,” should carry a liknon full of leaves 
and thereon pronounce the words “ Bad have I fled, better have I found.”’ 


7 Schol. ad Callim. Hymn. i. 48: ἐν yap 
λείκνοις τὸ παλαιὸν κατεκοίμιζον τὰ βρέφη 
πλοῦτον καὶ καρποὺς οἰωνιζόμενο. The 
Scholiast on Aratus Phaen. 268, adds that 
this was done at birth, τὰ yap βρέφη τὸ 
πρῶτον γεννώμενα, K-T.r. 

58 The Scholiast on Callimachus thus defines 
the liknon: λίκνον οὖν τὸ κόσκινον ἣ τὸ 
κούνιον ἐν ᾧ τὰ παιδία τιθέασι. He is probably 
vague in his conception of ἃ λίκνον. Mr. 
Haward of King’s College, Cambridge, kindly 
tells me that he learnt from a Cornish _farmer 
that in olden days a corn-sieve served among 


of carrying a new-born child in a ‘corn-sieve’ 
are collected by Mannhardt in his valuable 
chapter ‘Kind und Korn’ in his Mythologische 
Forschungen, p. 366. 3 

5° Ps. Plut. Prov. Alex. xvi. νόμος ἦν 
᾿Αθήνῃσι ἐν τοῖς γάμοις ἀμφιθαλῆ παῖδα λίκνον 
βαστάζοντα ἄρτων πλέων εἶτα ἐπιλέγειν Ἔφυγον 
κακὸν εὗρον ἄμεινον. And see Zenob. Prov. iii. 
98. Eustath. ad Od. xii. 357. Suidas, s.v. 
ἔφυγον κακόν. 

80 Hermann (Lehrb. iv. 275) states on the 
authority of Wachsmuth (Das Alte Griechenland 
im Neuen, Ὁ. 158) that among the modern 
Greeks a boy with both parents alive 
(uovvoxopovdaros) still carries the bride cakes to 
the bride. 

Υ 2 


816 JANE E. HARRISON 


Zenobius and Eustathius in discussing the custom and the saying add the 
detail that the boy was crowned with acanthus and acorns. Eustathius and 
Suidas both explain the custom as symbolic of a transition from rude to 
civilized life. It is abundantly clear that here again the liknon is used as an 
‘omen for wealth and fruits’; it brings luck to the newly married pair. The 
loaves of fermented bread (ἄρτος) are of course a late element; in primitive 
days their place would be taken by cakes and earlier by uncooked grain 
and fruits. 

Our literary evidence is late, but fortunately we have monumental 
evidence that goes back to the sixth century B.c. The design in Fig. 13 is 
from a black-figured vase now in the British Museum.®! The reverse of the 
vase only is published here; the obverse represents Theseus slaying the 
Minotaur, and has no connection with the present discussion. The scene 
represented on the reverse is, as Mr. Walters in the Catalogue rightly explains, 
a wedding procession. A quadriga carries the bridal pair; the bride is veiled ; 
behind the quadriga stands the parochos, who strictly speaking ought to be in 
the chariot. The procession is preceded by a bearded man, possibly the 
proegetes. The chariot is accompanied by three women; it is their function 
that concerns us. The first and third carry vessels that are obviously likna. 
On this point, if the vessel carried by the hindmost woman be compared with 
the ‘fan’ in Fig. 7, there can be no shadow of doubt; the shape is the 
same, the handles and the material, wicker-work. The vessel carried by 
the front woman is obviously the same as that carried by the hindmost one, 
but the vase-painter has not troubled to indicate by incised lines the wicker- 
work material. 

The exact significance of the vessel carried by the middle woman must 
remain uncertain. As Mr. Walters points out, it may be asieve. Pollux 
states that the bride carried a sieve. If she did it was, like the liknon, a 
symbol of fertility rather than as Pollux ® suggests the ‘ symbol of her proper 
work,’ As we do not know the exact shape of the Greek sieve, it is perhaps 
safer to interpret the flat-shaped vessel as merely a basket (κανοῦν). 

As to the contents of the two likna we are left, as in the Hellenistic urn, 
(Fig. 12) in complete uncertainty. They may hold grain, fruits, or cakes, 
or leaves, or a mixture of all. Whatever the exact contents, they were 
symbols of fertility. 

It may perhaps be objected that marriage is not a ‘ mystery.’ The Anglican 
Church no longer includes marriage in its sacraments and from her marriage 
service all symbolism save that of the ring is now excluded. She still how- 
ever prays that the married state may be consecrated to an ‘ excellent mystery ’ 
and in this respect follows Greek precedent. The Greeks conceived of mar- 


5! Cat. Bb, 174. Published by kind permission authenticity is doubted by some competent 


of Dr. A. 8. Murray. The carrying of the liknon 
at the marriage of Eros and Psyche is also 
depicted on the famous ‘Tryphon’ gem 
formerly in the Marlborough collection and now 
in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, As its 


judges I have decided not to reproduce it here. 
See my Prolegomena, Chap. x. p. 533, 
62 Poll. On. iii. 37 ὕπερον δὲ ἐξέδουν πρὸ τοῦ 


θαλάμου ὥσπερ καὶ κόσκινον ἣ παῖς ἔφερε, σημεῖα 


ὡς εἰκὸς αὐτουργίας. 


“ὦ. UU! UO eee lal 


σι, ΩΣ οι of γεγαμηκότες. 
‘ Pa Vie ates tet θύρσοις τῶν γυναικῶν καὶ τοῖς στεφάνοις ἐξέπλητ- 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 317 


riage as a rite of initiation, and as an initiation-rite it was preceded by 
elaborate purifications. The word τέλη in its plural form was used of all 
mysteries, and the singular form τέλος was expressly applied to marriaye.™ 
In any case the carrying of the liknon at marriage was mystical in the 
sense that it was megical, an endeavour by sympathetic magic to compel 
fertility. 

The two mysticisms of the liknon, i.e. purification and the fertility charm, 
may seem to our modern minds very far asunder. To the primitive Greek 
mind they are very near together, nay, almost inseparable. Fertility can 
only be promoted by purification, i.e. by the purging away of all evil influ- 
ences that impede birth and growth. It is also abundantly clear how the 
purest spiritual mysticism may have its root deep down in the most rudi- 
mentary magic. You carry a basket of fruits at marriage that by sympathetic 
magic you may induce fertility, and the basket of fruits becomes the symbol 
and sacrament of the whole moral and spiritual field covered by the formu- 
lary : ‘Bad have I fled, better have I found.’ 


We pass to our third and last enquiry. 


3.—Classed as it is among the instruments of Ceres, how and why did the 
‘fan’ pass into the service of Iacchus? 


First it must be established clearly that the ‘fan’ was used in the 
service of Tacchus, and that the words of Virgil are not merely a vague 
poetical attribution. An epigram in the Anthology records the dedication by 
a worshipper of his Dionysiac gear. After the enumeration of various instru- 
ments, rhombos, cymbal, thyrsos, and the like we have: 


καὶ κούφοιο βαρὺν τυπάνου βρόμον, ἠδὲ φορηθὲν 
πολλάκι μιτροδέτου λίκνον ὕπερθε κόμης." 


The carrying of the liknon on the head was clearly an ordinary feature in 
a Dionysiac revel. 

Plutarch in his life of Alexander ® states that Olympias in her en- 
thusiasm for barbaric orgies introduced as a new element large tame serpents, 
and these used to creep out of the ivy and out of the mystic likna and twine 
round the thyrsi and garlands of the women, and frighten the men out of 
their senses. Here the new element is the serpents; the likna are a Tegular 
part of the orgies of Dionysus from very ancient days (ἐκ τοῦ πάνυ 


. παλαιοῦ). ᾿ 


Monumental evden again confirms the testimony of literature. The 


* Poll. On. iti. 88 καὶ τέλθε ὃ γάμον ἐκαλεῖτο οἱ πολλάκις ἐκ τοῦ κιττοῦ καὶ τῶν μυστικῶν 
λίκνων παραναδυόμενοι καὶ περιειλιττόμενοι τοῖς 


τον τοὺς ἄνδρας. 


318 JANE E. HARRISON 


design in Fig. 14 is from the fragment of a relief now at Verona.” The two 
objects depicted, the mask and the liknon, are obviously both of them equally 
symbols of Dionysus. The liknon here, as in Fig. 6, contains fruits. How 
inconvenient a basket it is for fruits is shown by the way they fall out over the 
shallow end. 

When used in the service of Dionysus the /iknon ordinarily contains not 
only fruits but the symbol of human life and growth, the phallos. Some- 
times as in Fig. 6 both phallos and fruits appear, sometimes the phallos 
only. ἷ 


Fic, 14.—L1kNoN AND ΠΙΟΝΎΒΙΑΟ ΜΆΑΒΚ. 


The designs in Figs. 15 and 16 are from the obverse and reverse of a 
votive disk now in the Fitzwilliam Museum ® at Cambridge. How precisely 
these disks were set up is not quite clear. They are usually perforated as 
though for suspension, and in Pompeian paintings similar objects appear 
suspended between columns. In Fig. 6 disks of this kind are seen decorating 
the circular shrine in which the liknon is set up. If these are really disks 
they must have been attached at the base to the wall. 


66 Verona, Museo Lapidario. Schreiber, graphs impossible. A disk obviously from the 


Hellen. Rel, ci. 

87 Michaelis Anc. Marbles, p. 261, Nos. 70 
and 71. The designs on this disk have been 
very indifferently published in the Musewm 
Disneyanwm Pl. 37, 1 and 2. Figs. 15 and 16 
are from drawings kindly made for me by Mrs. 
Hugh Stewart. The very low and somewhat 
indistinct character of the reliefs made photo- 


same workshop may be seen in the basement of 
the British Museum (No. 31). It is somewhat 
more coarsely executed. The design on the 
ubverse represents an old Satyr holding a 
thyrsos in the left hand and supporting with 
his left a liknon on his head ; on the reverse is 
Pan with pedum and mask. An altar appears 
in both scenes. ᾿ 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 319 


320 JANE E. HARRISON to. 


The subject of these disks is frequently Dionysiac. On the obverse of 
the Cambridge specimen a bearded man with floating drapery approaches an 
altar. In his right hand he bears an object that I am unable to make out 
clearly ; it is probably a bundle of twigs. Held as it is horizontally it can 
scarcely be a torch. In his uplifted left the man bears a liknon. On the 
obverse it is not clear what the liknon contains. On the reverse an old man 
carries with both hands a liknon that contains a phallos. ® . 

On Graeco-Roman sarcophagi®® and on late Hellenistic reliefs (e.g. 
Fig. 6) the phallos is openly paraded by worshippers both male and female 
in Dionysiac revels; but it is important to note that, in actual ritual 
scenes where a definite religious ceremony of initiation is going on, the 
liknon containing the phallos is always veiled, or, in instances where it has 
just been unveiled, the worshipper himself is veiled. 

The design in Fig. 17 is from the stucco decoration of the Farnesina 
palace in Rome; the stucco reliefs are now in the Museo delle Terme.” 
The scene is clearly one of initiation: the boy’s head is veiled. The 
ceremony has some connection with Dionysus, as the candidate holds a 
thyrsos. A priest is in the act of unveiling the liknon. It is of the usual 
shape, and the priest holds it by one of the handles. The priestess behind 
the boy is probably touching his head, but the stucco at this point is 
broken away. Still further to the right a priestess stands near a sacred 
cista; her right hand is extended and the left holds a timbrel. The whole 
scene takes place in a precinct marked by two columns and a tree, 
The design in Fig. 18, from a blue glass amphora in the Museo Civico 7 
at Florence, represents an analogous scene. Again we have the veiled 
boy, but here he bears the liknon itself closely veiled upon his head. He 
carries this time not a regular thyrsos” but a branch of a tree decked with a 
taenia. 

When the liknon is veiled it’ is of course impossible to say with 
certainty what it contained. It is, however, probable that among the sacra 
was the phallos. On a ‘Campana’ relief, figured by Baumeister’ but 


68 Diodorus (iv. 6) emphasizes the use of the | 


phallos among agriculturists as a prophylactic 
against the evil eye and says that it is employed 
ἐν ταῖς τελεταῖς ob μόνον ταῖς Διονυσιακαῖς ἀλλὰ 
καὶ ταῖς ἄλλαις σχεδὸν ἁπάσαις. 

8 The ζέζποι occurs very frequently on 
Graeco-Roman sarcophagi. I noted two in- 
stances among the sarcophagi in the Campo 
Santo at Pisa, and three in the sculpturo 
galleries of the Vatican. The φαλλοφορία is 
clearly shown in a sarcophagus in the entrance 
hall of the Museum at Naples, of which there 
is an indifferent drawing in Gerhard’s Antike 
Bildwerke. For a complete collection of these 
sarcophagi we must await the volume of 
Dionysiac subjects promised in Dr. Roberts’ 
official publication of these monuments, 


τὸ Helbig Fiihrer 2nd edit., p. 237, No. 1122 
(4). The official publication Monwmenti dell 
Inst. suppl. T. 35 (=Lessing and Mau T. 15) 
gives no idea of the delicate beauty of the 
original reliefs. Fig. 17 is from a photograph. 

71 E, Caetani-Lovatelli. Antichi Monumenti 
Illustrati, Tay. xv. p. 201. 

7 The scene is clearly one of Dionysiac wor- 
ship, as is shown by the portion of the design 
not figured here. Behind the boy on a pedestal 
is a Herm with thyrsos attached, and behind it 
a mask with pointed ears, 

73 Baumeister, Fig. 496, p. 450. The Kestner 
Museum at Hanover contains ἃ terracotta 
plaque with a design almost exactly identical 
with that figured by Baumeister. 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 321 


» αὶ Si ee 
Sem me an Wt mee ers 


——e 


any 


ne .- " > - = 
; Se : 


co RELIEF. 


ΠΟ 


Fic. 17.—Srtt 


322 _ JANE E. HARRISON 


not reproduced here, we have a scene of initiation represented with the 
liknon unveiled. It contains fruits and phallos. The candidate is still 
veiled ; his head is supported by an attendant-woman, 
probably a priestess. Behind him a Bacchante strikes 
her timbrel. 


mental evidence, the facts that the liknon was certainly 
used in the worship of Dionysus, and that a phallo- 
phoria formed a part of Dionysiac mysteries. We can 
now return to the evidence of Servius. 

Servius states that Father Liber was called among 
the Greeks Liknites 1.6. ‘ He-of-the-liknon’: the liknon 
in-this case being, as he goes on to explain, used as 
acradle. Liknites is Dionysus as a babe in a cradle. 
Fortunately Plutarch confirms this statement. In 
speaking of the worship of Dionysus at Delphi™ he 
says the Delphians hold that they possess the relics 
of Dionysus buried by the side of their oracular shrine, 
and the Hosioi make a secret sacrifice in the sacred 
precinct of Apollo when the Thyiads raise up Liknites. 

How exactly the Thyiads ‘raised up’ or wakened 
the child-god we do not know; but the design in Fig. 4 
already discussed in relation 2 the cradle-liknon may 
represent the ritual of the wakening. Some act in a 
‘mystery’ is evidently depicted. The two men hold- 
ing the liknon seem to emerge hurriedly from behind 

Fic. 18. the curtain; the flaming torches show that the scene 

takes place at night, the usual time for the mysteries of 

Dionysus. It may be conjectured that, at a given signal, the birth of the 

sacred child was announced and the attendants, possibly the Hosior them- 

selves, issued from behind a screen or veil, bearing the new-born child in 
the liknon. 

Servius says that Father Liber was the same person as Osiris, and he 
further states that Isis carried the limbs of the dismembered Osiris on her 
head in a sieve. Father Liber, too, was torn to pieces, and he leaves us to 
infer that in the contents of the mystic fan the dismembered Dionysus is 
also symbolized. It is worth noting that Plutarch, in the passage already 
cited’> makes substantially the same statement. ‘ You, Clea, he says, ‘if 
any one, should know that Osiris is the same as Dionysus, you who’ are 
president of the Thyiads at Delphi, and were initiated by your father or 
mother into the rites ‘of Osiris” The central act of the cult of the Egyptian 


ἴω 


νὸς 
oo 
SS)“ 


& 


Presta SN 


H 


god was his death, dismemberment, and subsequent resurrection; the central 


™ Plut. de Isid. et Osir, xxxv. 365 a. καὶ θύουσιν of “Osi θυσίαν, ἀπόρρητον ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ 
τοῦ ᾿Απόλλωνος, ὅταν αἱ Θυιάδες ἐγείρωσι τὸν Arxvirny. 
75 loc. cit. (364 6). 


So far we have established, from literary and monu- : 


MYSTICA VANNUS IACCHI. 


act of the cult of the Cretan and Orphiec Zagreus was the dismemberment 
of a bull who was held to be the vehicle of Zagreus. In this dismemberment 
the Orphic saw the means of purification and renewal of his own spiritual 
life. At Delphi the waking of the child Ziknites was accompanied by a 

‘secret sacrifice’ in which we may conjecture with all but certainty was 
enacted, whether symbolically or otherwise, the death and dismemberment of 
the god who was to be born anew as a child in the cradle. In a sense there- 
fore to the mystic the liknon which contained the new-born child contained 
the dismembered god from which he was reborn. 

Thus to the old symbolism of the basket of fresh fruits and the winnow- 
ing of grain from chaff was added the new, and perhaps Egyptian, mysticism 
of the palingenesia, ‘the death unto sin and the new birth unto righteousness. 
Charged with such a complex sacramentalism, we cannot wonder that the 
liknon was, as Harpocration said, in the words cited above, ‘ serviceable for every 
rite of initiation and every sacrifice.’ 


The fact that the liknon was used in rites of Dionysus has been clearly 
ascertained. The particular mystic significances that were associated with 
it in the cult of Dionysus have been in so far as is possible elucidated. There 
yet remains the cardinal problem: why did the liknon, in its origin an instru- 
ment for winnowing and always inconvenient as a basket for grapes, come to 
be the characteristic token of the wine-god ? 

The answer is very simple and I think convincing. Dionysus before he 
became the wine-god was the beer-god, the god of a cereal intoxicant.” As 
the god of a cereal intoxicant he needed the service of the winnowing-fan as 
much as it was needed by Demeter herself. When the cereal intoxicant, 
beer, was ousted by the grape intoxicant wine, the fan that had once been a 
winnower for grain became a basket for fruit. Its mysticism, as has already 
been seen, contained both elements, the symbolism of purification by winnow- 
ing, the symbolism of fertility in the fruit-basket. 

The worship of Dionysus, it is now I believe acknowledged on all hands, 
came to Greece from Thrace, and the national drink of the Thracians was 
barley-wine (οἶνος ἀπὸ κριθῆς). The god took one of his titles, Bromios,” trom 
the cereal bromos, which lives on in the modern Greek word βρῶμι. Another 
of his titles, Sabazios, he took from sabaia which is Illyrian for beer. When 
the Emperor Valens was besieging Chalcedon, by way of insult they shouted 
to him ‘Sabaiarius, ‘ beer-man’ or ‘ brewer... Ammianus Marcellinus,”® in 
telling the story, added in explanation: ‘sabaia is a drink of the poor in 
Illyricum made of barley or corn turned into a liquid.’ The Dalmatian Saint — 


~~ 


τὸ ‘The evidence for the use of a cereal intoxi- origin and nature of the worship of Dionysus, 
cant among northern peoples in primitive days 1 must refer to my ‘ Prolegomena to the Study 


, is fully collected by Hehn, Kulturpflanzen, 7th οἵ Greek Religion,’ chapter viii, ‘ Dionysus,’ 


n, ἘΠῚ eee Sa arnt core p. 414. 


nclusions for mythology. 78 Ammian. Marcell. 26, 8, 2: est autem sabaia 
7 r a full discussion of the titles pe ex ordeo vel frumento in liquorem conversis 


paupertinus in Illyrico potus. 


SN ον ον δι σὺ ae 


,"ν 


394 MYSTICA VANNUS TACCHT. 


Jerome, who must ate known the practice of his own ἘΠΕῚ says in 
commentary on Isaiah,’ there is a kind of drink made from grain and 
and in the provinces of Dalmatia and Pannonia it was called in the k 
barbarian speech sabaiwm.’ It is this god of a cheap cereal intoxicant, des 
by the rich, who brings sleep to the eyes of the slave in the wae al 
Aristophanes. Re: | 
It was the wine-god, not the beer-god, who came down from Thrace i “ae 
triumph into Hellas; but though it was the grace and glory of the grape tha 
won all men’s fears: the earlier ruder cereal drink is never quite pea τ 
and the memory of it is preserved for ever in the. | "i 


mystica vannus [acchi. 


JANE E. ILARRISON. 


Hieron. Comm. 7 in Is. cap. 19: quodgenus _ gentili barbaroque sermone appellatur sateen Γ 
vst potionis ex frugibus aquaque confectum et 8° Ar, Vesp. 9: 
vulgo in Dalmatiae Pannoniaeque provinciis οὔκ, ἀλλ᾽ ὕπνος μ᾽ ἔχει τις ἐκ Σαβαζίου. ΐ 


SOME POINTS WITH REGARD TO THE HOMERIC HOUSE. 


Some scholars, in the face of the great difficulties presented by all 

attempts to reconcile the indications given in Homer with any reconstruction 

x of a house that may correspond to them, have despaired of success to such an 

extent, that they fall back on the arguments of confusion in the text, or 

. ignorance of what he is trying to describe, on the part of the writer or 

compiler of the Odyssey as we have it. If any apology is needed for a further 

contribution to the already copious literature on this subject, it must rest on 

the ground that, before we give up the question in despair, no theory ought 

to be left untried. The present paper is mainly an attempt to deal with the 

difficulties presented by Od. xxii. 126-177, of which the first twenty-one lines 
contain nearly all that is important. 


᾿Ορσοθύρη δέ τις ἔσκεν ἐυδμήτῳ ἐνὶ τοίχῳ, 
ἀκρότατον δὲ παρ᾽ οὐδὸν ἐυσταθέος μεγάροιο 
ἣν ὁδὸς ἐς λαύρην, σανίδες δ᾽ ἔχον εὖ ἀραρυῖαι. 
τὴν δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεὺς φράζεσθαι ἀνώγει δῖον ὑφορβὸν 
130 ἑστεῶτ᾽ ayy’ αὐτῆς" μία δ᾽ οἴη γίγνετ᾽ ἐφορμή. 
τοῖς δ᾽ ᾿Αγέλεως μετέειπεν, ἔπος πάντεσσι πιφαύσκων" 
“ὦ φίλοι, οὐκ ἂν δή τις av’ ὀρσοθύρην ἀναβαίη 
καὶ εἴποι λαοῖσι, βοὴ δ᾽ ὥκιστα γένοιτο ; 
τῷ κε τάχ᾽ οὗτος ἀνὴρ νῦν ὕστατα τοξάσσαιτο." 
18 τὸν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπε Μελάνθιος, αἰπόλος αἰγῶν: 
“ οὔ πως ἔστ᾽, ᾿Αγέλαε διοτρεφές: ἄγχι γὰρ αἰνῶς 
αὐλῆς καλὰ θύρετρα, καὶ ἀργαλέον στόμα λαύρης" 
καί χ᾽ εἷς πάντας ἐρύκοι ἀνήρ, ὅς τ᾽ ἄλκιμος εἴη. 
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγεθ᾽, ὑμῖν τεύχε᾽ ἐνείκω θωρηχθῆναι 
140 ἐκ θαλάμου: ἔνδον γάρ, ὀΐομαι, οὐδέ πῃ ἄλλῃ 
ν τεύχεα κατθέσθην ᾿Οδυσεὺς καὶ φαίδιμος υἱός 
! . ὡς εἰπὼν ἀνέβαινε Μελάνθιος, αἰπόλος αἰγῶν, 
ἐς θαλάμους ᾿Οδυσῆος, ἀνὰ ῥῶγας μεγάροιο. 
ἔνθεν δώδεκα μὲν σάκε᾽ ἔξελε, τόσσα δὲ δοῦρα 
146 καὶ τόσσας κυνέας, χαλκήρεας ἱπποδασείας" 
τς βῆ δ᾽ ἴμεναι, μάλα δ᾽ ὦκα φέρων μνηστῆρσιν ἔδωκεν. 


_ Before snaking: Adee the difficulties involved in this passage, it is 
| ome ides ἃ of the general plan of the Homeric house. It is 


- ἐν 


cay 


> 
- 


ΜΕΈΓΑΡΟΝ A. Door to women’s apart- 
ments, 
O O KIO.N B. Adios οὐδός. 


C) ‘ESXAPA Β΄, μέλινος οὐδός. 


C. ὀρσοθύρη. 


Ο Ο ὁδὺς ἐς λαύρην. 
p.{ 


στόμα λαύρης. 


| ae a E. Aadpn. 
| ape Ἴ : Ε, θάλαμος ὅπλων. 
6. θάλαμοι. Υ 
προδομος ᾿ 
H. Women’s apartments. 
iL ; — L δ Ὁ L Κ. κλῖμαξ. 
L. καλὰ θύρετρα. 
AIQOOYSA 
(δ) © 
AYAH 
Fie 1. 


The above plan is mainly a combination of some of the features of Tiryns and Cnossus ; 
μέγαρον, mpddouos, and αἴθουσα come from Tiryns, as also does thedoor A. H represents the position 
which I believe the women’s quarters to have occupied at Tiryns. E, F, G, L, and K come from 
Cnossus ; C and Ὁ are found both at Cnossus, in the Hall of the Double-Axes, and in some of 
the houses at Phylakopi. E is also found in the palace of Phylakopi and at Mycenae. Only part 
of the house is represented. The men’s bedrooms may have occupied a position on the other 
side of the hall corresponding to F and G, or may have opened on the αὐλή. f 


Ὄ; 


= > MAIN ] 
: ᾿ ENTRY ss Ἑ | 
j 
f 
4 
PAO FY 
O' 
: Lacum | 
Fi : | 
i : ‘ 
Ξι πο ἘΞ _WAYSO} | | | 
- " | 
sisi SS a4 : 
wow.en’s Hivest 
ul 
namo fh” \ | ἣν | 
= ee pate’ aT μ᾿ τ XS Bhi εἰ 
| ἐὺ | γεβτι ὃ 
᾿ | \ Η pur | | 5 
ΡΣ 9 © a abe 
-\ [4 mMECARON ΒΕΣΙ zm 
As Gee ea ee | 
ἜΣ ἢ η 
ὧν 
Pa a ee 
may τὶ it : Zh 
ἼΣ i A Ὅν 
= 
ἝΩ Ἶ fe 
7, | 
lr wy NG VAY 
“:5 


Fig. 2.---ΤῊΒ PALACE AT TIRYNs. 
(From J. H.S, xx. p. 181). 


(The descriptions ‘women’s thalamos,’ ‘women’s forecourt,’ &c., in the above plan, refer to 
the old identification, not to that advocated in this paper), - 


Ὁ 8 8} 


f 


Fig. 3.—CNossus. : Fic. 6.—PHYLAKOPI. 
(From B.S. A, viii. Pl. I.) (From B.S,A. v. Pl, I.) 


Pe ee eS ε αστεης Fic. 7. 
PHYLAKOPI, 
Fie. 4.—CNossvs. (From 
(From B.S. A. viii. Pl. I.) B.S.A. v. Pl. 1.) 


Fic. 5.—MyYcENAE. 
(From J. H.S. xxi. p. 293.) 


328 GUY DICKINS 


commonly agreed that on entering the αὐλή or courtyard, you proceeded 


through a portico into the great hall or μέγαρον. Nearly all further detail 
becomes controversial, and may be divided into three main questions : 


(i.) The position of the women’s quarters. 
(ii.) The existence of a πρόδομος or ante-room as well as an αἴθουσα or 
portico. 
(iii.) The internal geography of the μέγαρον. 


With questions (i.) and (ii.) this paper does not pretend to deal. The old 
view, which has been set forth most clearly by Prof. Jebb, was that the 
women’s quarters of the Homeric palace lay behind the men’s μέγαρον and 
communicated with it by a door. This contention was based both on the 
interpretation of the Odyssey and on the traditional form of the later 
Hellenic house. Mr. J. L. Myres, however,! has already in this Journal put 
forward a view based on the actual evidence of excavation, which strikes at 
one foundation of the old theory by providing a more adequate explanation 
of the Homeric story, while, in a more recent number? Prof. Ernest Gardner 
has thrown grave doubt on the traditional form of the Hellenic house. None 
of the houses excavated at Delos appears to conform to the plan of Prof. Jebb, 
and it seems therefore unnecesary here to consider any further arguments 
against this theory. . 

The hypothesis, however, on which this paper js based is not exactly the 
form of house upheld by Mr. Myres, that is to say, the plan of the palace at 
Tiryns. He maintains that the women’s quarters of the Homeric house 
existed in a separate building connected with the men’s apartments only by 
a somewhat tortuous passage. It is far from certain that the women’s 
quarters at Tiryns were in the position indicated by Mr. Myres, although the 
excavations at Mycenae and Phaestus certainly point to their occasionally 
being so placed, while in no case can such a house, I think, have been the 
scene of the Homeric story: in the palace of Odysseus communication be- 
tween the apartments of the men and women involved far less time and 
trouble than it could have done at Tiryns. Accordingly the general plan 
submitted in this paper is based on a view suggested by Prof. Ernest 
Gardner, viz. that the women’s quarters in the Homeric palace were contained 
in the same building as the men’s, and opened, like theirs, directly on 
πρόδομος, αἴθουσα, or αὐλή. 

The second question is one of less importance and interest. The 
passages 5 quoted by Mr. Myres combined with the evidence of excavation 
point decidedly to the existence of both πρόδομος and αἴθουσα. 

The most difficult questions in connection with the Homeric house are 
concerned with the internal geography of the μέγαρον. Of the chief 
difficulties that arise, one, viz. the position of the two οὐδοί, has been satis- 
factorily answered by Mr. Myres,* whose view I have adopted, but on the 


1 J.HS. vol. xx. p. 128, 3 J.H.S, vol. xx. p. 144, 
2 J.H.S. vol. xxi. p. 298. * J.H.S. vol. xx. p. 136. 


, 


SOME POINTS WITH REGARD TO THE HOMERIC HOUSE. 329 


others, viz. the nature and position of the ὀρσοθύρη and the ῥῶγες, together 
with the interpretation of the whole passage beginning at Od. xxii. 126, it 
still seems necessary for fresh light to be thrown. 

Turning to this passage we find Odysseus standing on the great thresh- 
old with helmet, shield, and two spears, which Telemachus has fetched from 
the θάλαμος ὅπλων together with three other equipments for himself, 
Eumaeus, and Philoetius. The bow shooting is over, and the three chief 
suitors, Antinous, Eurymachus, and Amphinomus, are,dead. For a moment 
there is a lull in the conflict ; Odysseus and his party make fresh arrange- 


- ments for renewing the fight, and the terror-stricken suitors have time to 


gather their wits together. 

In the context we find mention of an ὀρσοθύρη," whatever that may be, 
and of a ὁδὸς ἐς λαύρην or way into the passage. Mr. Myres thought that 
these two terms referred to one means of exit from the hall, but here 
Prof. Jebb seems to be right in separating them. In my plan C is the 
ὀρσοθύρη, and D the ὁδὸς és λαύρην. This is different from the arrange- 
ment of Prof. Jebb, who puts both the ὀρσοθύρη and the ὁδός in the hall 
itself—a plan which I venture to think is fatal to the interpretation of the 
passage, and with which I shall deal later. There must have been some need in 
the Homeric house of rooms corresponding to pantries, and thus, both for these, 
and for serving purposes in general, a side door in the hall becomes natural 
and almost essential. It is true that this is a departure from the plan of 
Tiryns, as far as we can judge from the extant remains, but then neither need 
we suppose that all Homeric houses were alike, nor that the writer is basing 
his description on the actual plan of Tiryns. The story of the Odyssey cannot 
be worked out accurately in a plan identical with Tiryns, but the differences 
are not essential, and in this particular case the new discoveries at Cnossus ὃ 
give ample evidence of the use of such a side door in the Hall of the Double- 
Axes. This side door then is the ὀρσοθύρη, about half way down the side of 
the ball, as will be shewn later; it does not, however, enter directly the 
rooms marked G but a passage or λαύρη as at Cnossus. At Tiryns also 
there is a Aavpyn, but it has a more tortuous course. Now there would 
obviously be need of another means of access to these chambers off the 
λαύρη, instead of making the μέγαρον the only approach, and for evidence ot 
this it is only necessary to consult some of the plans shewn on p. 327, 


5 Mr. Myres seems to be right in explaining 
ὀρσοθύρη asa trap door of some kind. Other 
compounds of ὀρσο- and ὀρσι- seem to be active 
in meaning, but doubtless the passive sense is 
also possible. Prof. Ernest Gardner has sug- 
gested to me that the ὀρσοθύρη may be a species 
of serving-hatch, a suggestion which fits in 
well with the theory of this paper as it explains 
why a single man might slip through while a 
combined rush would be practically impossible. 

6 A glance at the plan of the gallery of the 
treasure-chambers on the west side of the palace 


H.S.— VOL, XXIII. 


of Cnossus, which is reproduced in Fig. 4, shews 
how admirably that will suit the Homeric 
narrative. Here we have an excellent example 
of the Aavpn with treasure-chambers and 
store-rooms leading from it and a passage P, 
which may well correspond to ῥῶγες if we accept 
the derivation of that word from ῥήγνυμι, and 
take its meaning to be a crooked winding 
passage. Compare also the ‘dog’s-leg’ passage 
leading from the Hall of the Double-Axes to the 
Queen’s μέγαρον. 


380 GUY DICKINS 


notably those of Cnossus and Phylakopi. In the house of Odysseus then this 
λαύρη ran along the side of the hall, and opened into the πρόδομος by the door 
marked D. This door D is far more naturally the ὁδὸς ἐς λαύρην than any 
dour that can be imagined elsewhere. We have a description of its position 
as ἀκρότατον παρ᾽ οὐδόν. The οὐδός of stone stretched well beyond the 
actual door. It afforded an excellent platform for Odysseus to shoot from, it 
was probably the scene of the fight with Irus, and in Od. iv. 715 it seems to 
be applied to a large portion of the floor: it was probably the term used for 
the stone paving which in some cases, as at Tiryns, covers the whole of a 
court or portico. Thus to describe the ὁδὸς és λαύρην as ἀκρότατον Tap’ 
οὐδόν is both simple and sufficient: there is no need for the strained inter- 
pretations which have been given of οὐδός in this passage as ‘plinth’ or 
‘topmost step.’ 

We must now follow the movements of Eumaeus. It is usually supposed 
that he was sent to guard the ὀρσοθύρη, but there are ample reasons why 
this should not have been the case. 

(1) He is not told to go through it, into the passage but to stand near 
it, zap’ αὐτήν. Now there is no conceivable position in which he could 
stand near it in the hall, where the following remark would be justified : 


Ν 3 e , 3 ΄ > / a >» ” 
Kal x εἷς πάντας EpUKOL ἀνήρ, ὃς T ἄλκιμος εἰη. 


There is no more ease in defending a door from the front of it than there is 
in fighting anywhere else with your back to the wall, nor have we any 
reason for supposing that Eumaeus was capable of defending himself from 
the suitors in such a position, where he could be attacked from three sides at 4 
once. He isan old man and obviously diffident of his strength (cp. Od. xxii. 

167 ἤ μιν ἀποκτείνω, αἴ Ke κρείσσων ye γένωμαι). On the other hand, if C 
you are defending a door from behind it, so that your opponents have to come 4 
in single file through the door in order to attack you, you obviously have a 

sreat advantage. Eumaeus would be in a very favourable position, and also | 
δι very useful one, as will soon be seen, if posted outside D. An objection : 
may arise from the traditional view that the ὀρσοθύρη was up a flight of steps. 
It may be urged that, at the top of such a flight of steps Eumaeus might 
well be considered in an unassailable position. But (i) there is no evidence 
for supposing that the ὀρσοθύρη was up a flight of steps. The supposition 
rests solely on the word ἀνέβαινε, which is used of egress through the 
ὀρσοθύρη, and Mr. Myres has shown by’ arguments, which need not here be 
dealt with, that ἀνά is used of all progress out of the hall, and towards the 
court, and xara of progress into it. It would be quite needless to climb up steps 
in order to descend them again to the passage, and the ascent to a conjectural 
upper Aavpy fails to explain the actual existence of a lower one. (ii.) Even 
if there were steps Eumaeus is not directed to climb up to the ὀρσοθύρη but 
to stand near it.. (iii) If he stood at the top of a flight of steps, he would be 
cut off from Odysseus, and not so accessible as the narrative shews he was. 


7 . Η. 5. vol. xx. p. 141. 


SOME POINTS WITH REGARD TO THE HOMERIC HOUSE. 331 


This third objection is particularly valid, because Odysseus bad no more arrows, 
and could not leave the door to go and help Eumaeus, who would be wholly 
isolated, while outside D he would be quite safe, readily accessible, and just 
as useful as at C, except in preventing the suitors from getting to the θάλαμος 
ὅπλων, Which Odysseus, howeyer, believed to be locked, or had forgotten, as 
appears in the sequel. 

᾿ς (2) The second reason for maintaining that Eumaeus was not told off to 
guard the ὀρσοθύρη is that, if he was, the remark of Agelaus in 1. 132 
becomes perfectly unintelligible. He proposes that someone should go 
through the ὀρσοθύρη, down the λαύρη, out into the αὐλή, and thence again 
to the town to bring help. He was in full view of the ὀρσοθύρη, and must 
obviously have supposed it unguarded. D, the ὁδὸς ἐς λαύρην, was out of his 
sight. 

Eumaeus then was sent to guard not the ὀρσοθύρη, but the ὁδὸς és 
λαύρην. This Prof. Jebb recognises, supposing that the ὀρσοθύρη was 
throughout in the possession of the suitors, but he puts the ὁδὸς ἐς 
λαύρην inside the hall, so making a* fourth entrance to the μέγαρον, a fact 
sufficiently improbable in itself for a room in which a large number of persons 
were to be trapped and slain. There seems to be no good reason why there 
should be a second side door in the hall as well as the ὀρσοθύρη. If it existed 
at all, it would presumably be, as described, at the edge of the threshold, i.e. 
in one of the corners behind Odysseus. This would be a useless post for 
Eumaeus, as it was well within reach of Odysseus, and the same arguments 
that may be brought against Eumaeus’ position by the ὀρσοθύρη apply equally 
well to his position at such a ὁδὸς ἐς λαύρην, or indeed any position inside 
the hall. It is a justifiable inference from the context that he was not 
actually in sight of the suitors at all. He and Philoetius and Telemachus 
visit the θάλαμος ὅπλων several times, and we can hardly suppose that they 
did so in full view of the suitors, who had only to go through the ὀρσοθύρη 
to intercept them in the passage. There seems to have been a route to the 
θάλαμος which was out of sight, and this would obviously be the way up the 
λαύρη. The objection which may be raised, that it seems curious to get rid 
of Eumaeus in a place quite out of the battle instead of making him fight is 
answered by the fact that (i.) he was an old man and presumably not of 
much real assistance, (ii.) that it was quite essential for somebody to guard 
the passage way in case some such planas that of Agelaus had been followed, 
and (iii.) that, when matters have actually come to a hand-to-hand tussle, he 
does come in with the others and takes part in the slaughter. 

We must now turn to Melanthius and his doings, which become quite 

explicable by this view. Agelaus has proposed that someone should go through 
the ὀρσοθύρη, and escape from the house to the town. To this Melanthius 
objects that it is not possible for two reasons: ‘the fair doors of the court 
are very near, and ® grievous is the exit from the passage.’ These fair doors 


2 _* The great door, the ὀρσοθύρη, the ὁδὸς 9. Mr. Myres suggests a connection between 


; ἼΩΝΑ door cccamienes in the ἀργαλέον and the Romaic ἀργά ‘hard to get to’ 
popularly used for ‘distant.’ 


332 GUY DICKINS 


are probably the three doors of the πρόδομος, which are shown at Tiryns, 
as Mr. Myres has pointed out, to have been at any rate of great size and 
weight, and which opened through the αἴθουσα on to the court. These: 
were very near in the sense that they were just behind Odysseus and his. 
adherents, and egress to the court would have to be made through them. 
Anybody attempting to escape through them, even if he passed Eumaeus,, 
would be sure to be noticed, and attacked by Telemachus or Philoetius. More- 
ever the exit of the passage is a place of great danger, and one man could 

easily guard it, as in fact Eumaeus was doing. This στόμα λαύρης is D, as. 
Mr. Myres also pointed out,—it is quite natural that it should be regarded 
from one point of view as a way into the passage, ὁδὸς és λαύρην, and from the 
other as a way out of it, στόμα λαύρης. The phrase applies far more naturally 
to D than to C, and the answer of Melanthius, again ignoring the presence of 
any danger at the ὀρσοθύρη, merely points out the difficulties that would meet 
anybody who had already reached the passage. The phrase μία δ᾽ οἴη γέγνετ᾽ 
ἐφορμή means that only one man could attack Eumaeus at a time, i.e. through 
the door itself. In no case could the phrase apply to Eumaeus if stationed 
inside the hall at a ὁδὸς és λαύρην like that of Prof. Jebb, for under these 
circumstances there would be two entrances to the passage, and two methods 
of attacking him, i.e., either from the hall or from the passage. We may also. 
notice here one argument of Mr. Myres’ in favour of his theory of an upstairs 
λαύρη. He says Agelaus proposed that some one should go up through the 
ὀρσοθύρη on-to the roof, and thence warn the people; but if this was possible. 
Melanthius could easily have done so when he actually did get out of the 
hall. Nor will this interpretation fit in at all with the explanation given 
above of the καλὰ θύρετρα and the ἀργαλέον στόμα λαύρης. 

So far then we may claim to have established that the ὀρσοθύρη was a 
side door in the hall leading out into the passage about half way up the side,. 
so that, while the suitors had to go up (ava) the hall to get there, it was stilk 
out of reach of Odysseus and his party; that the passage into which it led 
had an exit into the πρόδομος, and also various rooms and galleries leading 
out of it, and that, as Mr. Myres has lately suggested to me, it may well be- 
compared with the passage along the west side of the palace of Cnossus out. 
of which open the treasure-chambers and store-rooms for wine, etc. Doubt- 
less it was off this passage that the θάλαμος ὅπλων opened, represented in. 
the plan by Εἰ, a position agreeing well with the description μυχὸς δόμοιο. 

We come now therefore to Melanthius’ movements and the payes μεγά- 
poo. The most reasonable explanation of his actions is, I think, the follow- 
ing. Agelaus had proposed that someone should slip out of the ὀρσοθύρη: 
and warn the people. To this Melanthius replies by an alternative: ‘ No,. 
that will not be safe, but, as you mention the ὀρσοθύρη, I will make use of it 
to get you arms from the treasury, and then you can force your own way out.” 
Accordingly he slips through the ὀρσοθύρη, which is unguarded, up the λαύρη: 
into the θάλαμος, gets the arms, and returns in haste. This view interprets: 
p@yes, and indeed all Melanthius’ movements, in the same way as Prof. Jebb, 
on the analogy of the modern Greek podya=‘ narrow passages.’ The 


—— ἵ ee OT my, 
= 5 ene a 7"; τῶξ 
BPS = ie tis 


a 


SOME POINTS WITH REGARD TO THE HOMERIC HOUSE. 333 


derivation from ῥήγνυμι can be well understood by glancing at the tortuous 
entrance to F. The term may well have been applied to any winding broken 
passage. In this view as in all others there are difficulties to be met. It 
may be asked how such a passage can be described as ῥῶγες μεγάροιο when it 
is not actually in the hall at-all. The answer to this is that μέγαρον is not 
confined in meaning to the great hall of the palace. It is’ used of the 
women’s quarters, and also it is used of the house as a whole; the line 
which occurs twice in iv. 625 and xvii. 168 speaks of the αὐλή as προπάροιθε 
“μεγάροιο, where μέγαρον seems to be used of the whole block of. buildings 
comprising the palace, and it is in this latter sense that it seems to be used 
here, 
᾿ Exception may also be taken to the use of dvd in this passage, which is 
generally used of egress from the μέγαρον towards the αὐλή, while in this 
case the θάλαμος is in the μυχὸς δόμοιο, but ἀνά may well be used of all 
motion away from the hall and the ἑστία which was the centre of domestic 
life. 

With regard to the θάλαμος we know chee one θάλαμος, viz., that in 
which the bow was kept, was upstairs, but it is improbable that the one 
visited by Melanthius and Telemachus was the same. Access to it is easy and 
speedy, cf. xxii. 112 βῆ δὲ φέρων, μάλα δ᾽ ὦκα φίλον πατέρ᾽ εἰσαφίκανεν and 
a similar line in xxii. 146, while, whenever Penelope mounts the κλῖμαξ, the 

_fact is mentioned. Mycenaean palaces seem to have abounded in treasure- 
chambers. 

Thus the movements of Melanthius are easily explained. We need only 
glance at the alternative suggestions for the meaning of ῥῶγες. Mr. Myres 
seems to favour the old view, supported by the drawings of Dr. Middleton, 
that the ῥῶγες referred to the clerestory of the hall and that Melanthius climbed 
up one of the pillars, and so out. This view, as Prof. Jebb points out, seems 
impossible. It is inconceivable that Melanthius should have climbed one of 
these pillars in full view of his antagonists, and returned with twelve sets of 
arms without being noticed by anybody on his first, and only by Eumaeus on 
his second, attempt. (Eumaeus could not of course have seen him performing 
this feat were he stationed outside D, however many times he did it.) More 
plausible is the view that would interpret ῥῶγες as windows or slits in the wall, 

or perhaps openings on the analogy of the Cretan light wells, but if there were 
- windows, it would be natural to suppose that more of the suitors would have 
tried to escape by them, while the passage up any light well that I have seen 
would not only be open to the same objections as the climbing of the pillars 
to the clerestory, but also be a matter of considerable difficulty. On the 
other hand, if the ὀρσοθύρη were on the ground floor, it would be compara- 
tively simple for Melanthius to slip through it unnoticed, though even here : 
_ n his second attempt he was observed by Eumaeus from his post outside D. 
τὺ Finally it may be asked why did not the suitors make arush for the ὀρσοθύρη, 
reach get out atthe that means? But obviously their numbers would have a 


— 


οι, Od. xviii, 185 and 128, and xix, 60, 4 Cf, Od. i. 276, xv. 128, and xx. 343. 
Ess ᾿ 


1 aK 
ae 


334 SOME POINTS WITH REGARD TO THE HOMERIC HOUSE. 


better chance in a fight in the great hall than in narrow passages, where 
one man might hold his post against twenty. In the hall they might 
overwhelm Odysseus, in the passages they would be slain like sheep. We 
may observe that when it is a question of one man slipping away unnoticed, 
Medon does deliberate whether he should escape through the ὀρσοθύρη to 
the αὐλή or throw himself on the mercy of Odysseus in the hall. 

No further points arise in regard to the house, so far as I can see, 
which present any inconsistency with the views discussed above, which I 
trust, therefore, will be allowed to have cleared up some of the difficulties-of 
the Homeric narrative. 

Guy DICcKINS. 


NOTE. 
List of passages in Odyssey referring to the Homeric House. 


I. 102-108, 119, 120, 125-131, 144, 145, 253-256, 28-335, 360-364, 425-427. II. 
337-345. ILI. 396-408. IV. 20-22, 39-51, 120-122, 296-305, 625-627, 675-689, 715-719, 
758-761. VI. 50-55. VII. 81-90, 95-98, 133-141, 334-317. VIII. 456-458. XV 
4-5. XVI. 283-286, 342-344, 413-416. XVII. 28-37, 96, 97, 167-169. 264-268, 324, 325, 
336-341, 492, 493, 507-51], 560-571. XVIII. 32, 33, 100-103, 185, 186, 196-198. XIX. 14, 
15, 59,60. XX. 1, 6-8, 91-97, 257-259, 387-389. XXI. 5-12, 148-150, 188-190, 242-244, 
376-392. XXII. 1-4, 21-25, 105-115, 126-204, 239, 240, 257-259, 330-337, 378-380, 
393 490, 433, 434, 457-460, 495-501. XXIII. 85-92, 293, 294. 


RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN ASIA MINOR. 


PERGAMUM, EPHESUS, AND MILETUS. 


THIS paper does not profess to give anything more than a brief account 
of the important results obtained by the German and Austrian excavators up 
to the time of my visit to these sites in June. I should like in particular to 
direct the attention of English archaeologists to Western Asia Minor as a 
field of research that is practically untouched, especially as regards remains 
of the Hellenistic period. Brilliant results await the scientific explorer of 
important sites such as Sardis, Tralles, Laodicea, and Apamea, and all these 
are extremely easy of access. The English traveller cannot help feeling 
ashamed of English archaeology when he sees the unintelligible mass of ruins 
and brushwood that covers the site of the Artemisium at Ephesus. 

My warmest thanks are due to Drs. Dorpfeld, Benndorf, Wiegand, and 
Heberdey for permission to use their plans and photographs : I am also under 
great obligations to Dr. von Schneider for illustrations of the Ephesus 
sculptures. I greatly regret that an accident at Ephesus, which rendered me 
lame for the best part of a week, made a closer personal examination of that 
site and Miletus impossible. 


Pergamum. 


Since the close of Dr. Humann’s and Dr. Conze’s famous excavations on 
the acropolis at Pergamum, Dr. Dérpfeld! has been engaged in the name of 
the German Archaeological Institute in clearing the Agora of the lower city 
and the part about the southern entrance to it where the great road to the 
Acropolis begins to climb the hill. Besides this Dr. Winnefeld has resumed 
the search for fragments of the altar and intends to excavate the terrace 
between the site of the altar and the shrine of Athena Nikephoros above, and 
afterwards to explore the lower terrace to the east of the road just before the 
great entrance gate to the Acropolis proper. 

Fortunately for the excavators the modern town of Bergama lies on the 
site of the Roman town in the semicircular hollow between the Asclepieum 


1 Ath, Mitt, 1902, p. 1 seqq. 


336 ALAN J. B. WACE 


hill, the Acropolis and the lower hill to the east, and it only just encroaches 
on the fringe of the Hellenistic city by the great south gate. The ancient 
approach to the great south gate is obscured by modern houses, but in all 
probability the roadway zigzagged up the gentle slope, while a shorter foot- 
path led straight up. At a point just between the Greek and Armenian 
cemeteries the road enters the wall of Eumenes II. To the right (to threaten 
the shieldless side of the enemy 7) a great square tower (A) stands out, and 
on the left was a smaller tower (B) to guard the return of the wall as it ran 
north-west. Passing the great tower the roadway entered a great square 
paved court and then immediately turned out of it again to the left, resuming 
its somewhat tortuous course upwards : reference to the plan will explain the 
position (Fig. 1). From the small tower (B) that guards the return of the 
wall, a short wall runs across and bonds with the west wall of the court just 
between the two gates. Just above this wall the pavement of an older road- 
way is visible: this was clearly the course of the great road till the enlarge- 
ment of the enceinte of the city undertaken by Eumenes II., for all the water 
pipes and sewers run straight down the hill at the side of this older pavement, 
The gate court itself was further defended by a yet larger tower (C) that 
stood out at the south-east angle. The south wall of the court between this 
tower (C) and tower A is pierced by a small gate, obviously the entrance for 
a footpath leading up the hill. This small gate, however, was walled up 
later in the Greek period, for the masonry is Greek: and not only was this 
gate walled up, but also a strong outside wall of the same thickness as the 
wall of the court was built between towers A and C. Further against the 
east side of the court a series of five whole and two engaged octagonal 
pillars supported a plain Doric entablature. Dr. Dorpfeld conjectures from 
traces of drain and water pipes that this roofed in a drinking fountain. 

The great road runs beyond this gate for a short distance north-west and 
then turns north-east, always ascending. Both here and higher up the con- 
struction of this road calls for remark: it is regularly paved with large un- 
even blocks of trachyte, while underneath this pavement run sometimes as many 
as six water pipes, and all along there is at the side a large square-built sewer. 
The sight of this magnificent road always steadily ascending to the Acropolis 
is one of the most imposing monuments of the greatness of Pergamum. 
Shortly after the great road turns north-east it passes on the left a large 
terrace cut westwards into the slope of the hill. This is the ‘Second 
Agora.’ It is entered by a small flight of steps at the north-east corner, and 
consists of a large open oblong court paved with flat. stone slabs and sur- 
rounded by a two-storied colonnade fronting rows of shops. The shops on the 
east are in good condition and have been roofed in to make a museum for 
small objects not worth removal. The whole agora is roughly eighty-eight 
metres long by fifty-five broad. Owing to the formation of the ground, the shops 
at the north-east corner are on a higher level and approached by a stone 
staircase: near by is the entrance to an underground water channel which 
comes down from a rock-cut cistern in the hill above. On the south side 
the shops are on a lower level and back on to the supporting wall of the 


egies so face’ satiedsdas to another πξτρλννΝ that presumably 
_ fronted a street running west from the great road. On the east the row of 


μ᾿ 


DES STADTBERGES 
NACH DEN 
AUSGRABUNGEN 
1900 - 1901. 


PERGAMON 
SUDLICHER ABHANG 


ξ 
> 
ee, 
CISTERNE 


ork” 


(After W. Dorpfeld, Ath. Mitt. 1902, pl. 1.) 


Fic, 1. 


GRIECHISCHER 
FRIEDHOF 
FRIEDHOF 


338 } ALAN J. B. WACE 


front of the colonnade surrounding the court. But on both these sides there 
was clearly a second storey on the same level as the court: perhaps on the 
south side there were no shops on the second storey but only an open double 
colonnade. The centre of the court was in later times the site of an early 
Christian Church. 

At the north-east corner of the agora a road turns off eastwards along the 
slope of the hill to the east gate which has been examined by Dr. Kolbe. It 
lies on the line of the modern road,*and is of a similar type to the gates on 
the north-west (see below). From the north-east corner of the Agora the 
great road, still ascending, runs above it to the west, then at the north-west 
corner turns sharp round to the right and runs up close under the late 
Roman fortification wall (see plan). Below the square tower of this wall, a 
great trench has been cut along the line of a narrow street which runs up the 
hill somewhat to the south-west of the corner of the great supporting wall of 
the gymnasium terrace above. Further along on the left of the great road 
and under the second round tower of the later fortification wall is the city 
fountain. This backs on to the wall of the terrace above, and consists of a 
basin (21x3'15m.) with twelve columns inside to support the roof. The 
upper part of it seems to have been of marble. On the same level as this 
fountain and on a narrow terrace running west above the level of the great 
road are remains of a gymnasium τὸ γυμνάσιον τῶν παίδων. The existing 
remains are chiefly those of a narrow Doric Stoa built against the buttresses 
of the supporting wall of the second terrace. Access to this second terrace 
is obtained by a vaulted staircase fronted by semi-circular steps, that leads up 
northwards just between the fountain and the gymnasium (Fig. 2). On this 
second terrace towards the south-east stood a Corinthian Temple of the late 
Hellenistic period: it was apparently prostyle-tetrastyle and was about 
14m. long by 7 wide. It seems to have been built of marble on limestone 
foundations. Also on this terrace are remains of partially excavated rooms 
and a stoa backing on to the retaining wall of the third gymnasium terrace. 
On this third terrace lie the imposing remains of the great Corinthian 
Colonnade of the γυμνάσιον τῶν νεῶν already previously identified by 
Humann. The noble proportions of this gymnasium are astonishing: and 
Dr. Dorpfeld’s future excavations here should produce results of great im- 
portance. 

Further Dr. Thiersch has examined the two gates on the north-west 
of the Wall of Eumenes II. On this side the city wall runs down the 
hill from the sharp point below the Temple of Faustina to another pre- 
cipitous point (just on the modern road) where it turns sharply south-east down 
the Selinus valley. The upper north-west gate lies about half way down, it is 
placed obliquely at the inside of an angle in the wall so that the left of the 
entrance is well guarded by the wall and the tower at the corner, while the 
right of the entrance is still further protected by a square tower. The 
lower north-west gate lies at the precipitous point on the modernroad. The 
situation is somewhat similar: the gate lies behind a tower which thus 
guards the entrance from the left, while from the right it is covered-by the © 


RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN ASTA MINOR. 339 


short stretch of wall between the gate and the great tower that stands out 
at the return of the wall. 

Of other discoveries the most important are the famous ‘ Astynomi’ 
nseription, and another dealing with moneychangers and the supply of 
small change which recalls vividly to the traveller the vagaries of Turkish 
currency. Sculpture is well represented by the magnificent Alexandroid 
head published by Dr. Conze (Ant, Denk, II. pl. 48. p. 9) and the warrior 


Fic, 2.—PERGAMUM. VAULTED ENTRANCE TO THE SECOND GYMNASIUM-TERRACE. 


Below on the right one end of the city-fountain. 


torso whose muscular development is most strikingly modelled (Thiersch. 
Ath, Mitt. 1902, p. 152). The ‘New fragment of the Dedication Inscrip- 
tion of the great Altar’ mentioned in the Philologische Wochenschrift of 
27th Dec., 1902 (v. Cl. Rev. Feb. 1903, p. 90) and said to date the altar to 
the reign of Attalus II is more or less of a myth. What has been found is 
merely a fragment of an inscription previously known as belonging to 
Attalus IT’s reign (Inschrift. v. Perg. No. 216) and apparently from a dedication 


340 ALAN J, B. WACE 


of sculpture of that king, but which Dr. Dorpfeld has suggested may have 
belonged to the great altar and been placed underneath the colonnade (not 
over it, as the true Dedication Inscription was). The attribution however rests 
on no sure grounds and is after all only a guess, and a guess that I believe to 
be incorrect. Dr. Winnefeld’s coming excavations on the terrace between the 
altar and the shrine of Athena will probably throw more light on this and 
several other points. 


Ephesus. 


The Austrian excavations at Ephesus (Fig. 3) which have been so ably 
and scientifically carried on since 1895 by Drs. Benndorf and Heberdey, with 
the assistance of Prof. George Niemann and Dr. Wilberg as architects, have not 


Fic, 3.—Epnesus, (Afier Capt. A. Schindler.) 


only revealed the stage of the theatre, the Roman forum, and the quay, but 
have cleared up several important topographical points. 

The theatre, one of the largest in Asia Minor, is a building of Roman con- 
struction over the theatre built by Lysimachus. It contains sixty-six rows of 
seats divided by two diazomata ; and by twelve rows of steps into eleven cunei. 
The seats are of limestone covered with marble. They are reached by two 
vaulted entrances from the west which lead to the first and second diazomata : 
there are also other vaulted entrances from the north and south to the second 
diazoma, On the walls of one of these entrances is an interesting inscription 
cut by the workmen, which helps to date the building. The seats do not reach 
to the level of the orchestra, which is separated from them by a wall 1:75 m, 


+4 


- 


RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN ASIA MINOR. 341 


high. Inside this isa balustrade with statue bases. The stage buildings consist. 
. principally of a central corridor, which had a second storey with a richly decor- 
& ated marble front and is entered by three doors. The old central corridor 
ean be traced and was broader and contained six or eight rooms. Before the 
skene three rows of marble pillars (the two back rows rounded, the front one 
square) with curious almost proto-Ionic capitals support the logeion, the ends of 
which run into the seats and so cut off a third of the orchestra. The logeion 
is approached from the north and south by ramps from outside, from the 
orchestra at each end and in the centre by steps. Between the front row of 
pillars below the logeion and the front wall is the space for the curtain to 
drop. Under the logeion in the centre is a wide entrance from the orchestra 
to the rooms under the skene. Below the present level of the orchestra 
can be seen the circular drain of the old orchestra, and also traces of its 
paving, which shews that in the Greek period the seats extended right down 
to it. 

Against the supporting wall of the skene and towards its northern end 
and fronting the road running north and south past the theatre isa Hellenistic 
fountain house in very good condition. The fountain heads can still be seen : 
its front was formed by a small Ionic colonnade and entablature. 

Below the theatre to the west the Austrians have cleared the terrace 
either side and below it part of a wide well-paved road running north and 
south past the theatre towards the stadium and Mount Coressus. At right. 
angles to this road and leading due west from the theatre is the great 
colonnaded road to the harbour. It is 500 metres long, 20 metres wide and 
was bordered each side by Corinthian porticoes 5 metres deep : an inscription 
shews it took its name from Arcadius (395-408 4.D.). Some system of lighting 
it by lamps appears to have been used. 

To the south-west of the junction of these roads and directly adjoining 
them is a large oblong open court. To the north-east between the Harbour 
road and Mr. Wood’s Prytaneum is a large marble building of uncertain use 
and of the Roman period. In the centre is a large open paved court, bordered 
on three sides by a Corinthian colonnade with unfluted columns and mosaic 
pavement, but on the north by several rows of marble seats rising up on 
vaulted substructures of brick; even the suggestion that it was a Bouleu- 
terion hardly seems satisfactory. As one proceeds harbourwards on the 
great road one passes the traces of another cross road running north and 
south, and much built over by Byzantine houses. Where these roads cross: 
are to be seen the square bases that supported four late monumental columns 
decorated with niches filled with statues.2 By following this cross road 
southwards one passes through a gate in the Byzantine wall and reaches 
on the left a marble gateway on the road from the ‘ Agora,’ to the harbour, 
as proved by the inscriptions found. On following the line of this road 
eastwards the great marble gate of the agora itself is reached, approached 
by a flight of much worn steps flanked by narrow projecting colonnades. 


2 y. Jahreshefle V, Beiblatt, p. 58. 


342 ALAN J. B. WACE 


of six columns. Either side is a large square water basin, the marble 
slabs of the southern one still shew the marks where water vessels were 
drawn up. Both these gates are Roman reconstructions of Greek work. The 
road continued westward and ended at the Roman building on the quay to 
the south. I understand it is in this region that the excavations will be 
continued this year: we may expect important results from the complete 
clearing of the agora and its entrances. Then by returning to the great road 
and following it westwards one reaches on the right, just before the ‘ great gym- 
nasium,’ which inscriptions shew to have been the Thermae Constantinianae, 
and opposite an exedra on the left, an open court in the shape of an oval 
with the ends cut off, surrounded by a mosaic paved colonnade:* at the north 
there is an exit flanked by two sarcophagus-shaped basins decorated with the 
ubiquitous bucrania and garland pattern, into a wide colonnade marble paved, 
called the Atrium Thermarum in inscriptions found here. Apparently on the 


Fic. 4.—REsSTORATION. 


rebuilding of the city in 263 A.D. after the sack by the Goths, new Thermae 
were built here which encroached on the south-west corner of the Forum. 
For the oval court already described was then built apparently to supply the 
place of the southern market hall of the Forum. The plan‘ of the forum is 
best seen by climbing one of the brick piers of the great Baths—the forum 
was a square whose sides were 70 metres long, bordered by Corinthian 
colonnades 9°80 m. deep. In the centre of each side except on the side against 
the Baths a large market hall opened into the colonnade; that to the 
south is the best seen. It is 32x16 metres; was richly decorated with 
marble on the floor and walls which have round and ‘square recesses symme- 
trically arranged. Entrance is obtained from the colonnade by eight openings 
through seven Corinthian pilasters; the roof was of wood and had no central 


3 vy. Jahreshefte V, Beiblatt, p. 59. 4 Jahreshefte 1, Beiblatt, p. 14... 


- 


———~ Se. 


- 


RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN ASIA MINOR. 343 


supports; this is inferred from the ashes found inside and the condition of 
the floor. Just before the road reaches the harbour it passes a Hellenistic 
tripylon gate which is not exactly in the centre of the way (Fig. 4). The 
central opening is square, while those at the side are arched. The entablature is 
richly decorated and on both sides the openings are flanked by Ionic columns 
in pairs. Further against the harbour was a lofty decorative entrance of 
Roman date in two storeys of the Corinthian order, and of curious shape 
(Fig. 5). Its side against the harbour is straight, while that towards the Great 
Road is semicircular. It seems to date from the second century A.v.*” 


Vee »ι Σ«-...... 


om 


Fic. 5.—RESTORATION. 


Beyond, various trenches and trial pits have proved the existence of a colon- 
naded quay running along the edge of the harbour, and an exchange to the north 
of the road: but the rapid growth of vegetation, and the presence of water 
which causes the excavations in this marshy ground to silt. up, make examin- 
tion very difficult, though an elaborate Roman quay building® to the south 
can be easily seen. . 

Besides the above important excavations, Dr. Benndorf has explored the 
wall of Lysimachus. From the large tower called St. Paul’s Prison (Fig. 6), 
a short stretch of wall ran north to the water’s edge, and the main wall ran west 
over the crests of two other hills, turned south across the small valley to another 
hill and then went east. But just after it turns east and in the dip between 


4a Figs. 4, 5, and 7 are after drawings by 4> Jahreshefte 1899, Beiblatt, p. 19. 
Prof. Niemann, and fromyclichés sent by Dr. 5 This was the end of the road from the 
von Schneider. * Agora,’ 


344 ALAN J. B. WACE 


the last hill and Mount Coressus is the Coressian gate, of the usual type flanked 
by two square towers. Then the wall runs east along the topmost. ridge of 
Coressus, on whose flat summit is a small square acropolis, and thence it runs 
down to the Magnesian gate. The construction of the wall is interesting. 
It is regularly built of roughly squared blocks of local limestone : the inside is 
filled with smaller stones packed with red earth. There are at more or less 
regular intervals well-built square towers with corbelled windows, and here and 
there along the line of the wall are small posterns. In short, this wall is a fine 
example of early Hellenistic fortification and in very good condition: the 
labour of building it on the steep and rocky ridge of Coressus must have been 
considerable, 


Besides this, Dr. Heberdey has made a careful study of the remains of a. 
round building on the hill behind the theatre (Fig. 7). Itis in two storeys and 
stands on a square base. The lower storey was of the Doric order with engaged 
columns. The upper was of the Ionic order and the columns stood free. Further 
above the Ionic entablature the building took a hexagonal form, and probably 
ended in a pyramid. The inside was solid and filled up with rough stone- 
work. It clearly belongs to the Hellenistic period, and Dr. Heberdey sug- 
gests that it was erected to celebrate the Ephesians’ victory at sea off Cyme- 
over Aristonicus, the claimant of the Pergamene throne (circa B.c. 152). 

One important topographical difficulty has been solved by the discovery 


5 Jahreshette 1, Beiblatt, 1899, p. 79. 


RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN ASIA MINOR. 345 


of the Hellenistic tripylon mentioned above. Formerly’ it was believed that 
the Great Harbour was of Roman date and that a Hellenistic Harbour once 
existed somewhere in the marshy ground north-west of Mr. Wood’s Prytaneum, 
between that and the double church. But since the tripylon by the 
Great Harbour is Hellenistic, then that Harbour was both Hellenistic and 
Roman. Dr. Heberdey informs me that excavation on the site of the 
supposed Hellenistic Harbour revealed nothing but late cottages close to the 
surface *: on digging below them nothing was found for some depth and then 
the trenches filled with water, which is one of the great difficulties excava- 


Fic. 7. —RESTORATION. 


tion on such a site has always to contend with, and one that can never be 
really overcome. 

Perhaps after all the most interesting of the spoils of Ephesus that 
have been obtained from these excavations are the numerous pieces of 
sculpture, both in bronze and marble, which are now temporarily exhibited in 
the ‘Theseus Tempel’ in the Volksgarten at Vienna. 

Most important of all is~ the bronze athlete rather over life size 


τ Jah I. Beiblatt, p56, ἡ 8 y, Arch, Anz, 1908, p. 77. 
Ρ 
HS.—VOL. XXIII AA 
. 


“τοι 


846 ALAN J. B. WACE 


(1:925m. high) already mentioned in this Journal.” It represents a nude youth 
resting on his right leg (the left being the free leg) in the act of using the 
strigil (Figs. 8 and 9). The left arm is held down at the side with the palm of 
the hand downwards in such a position as just slightly to stiffen the muscles: 
while the right hand which holds the strigil has just reached the wrist in its 


— re 


4 
»»ν 


Fig. 8. Fic. 9. 


course down the left arm. The head is inclined down to the left to watch 
the process. Dr. von Schneider! in the official catalogue of the exhibition 
claims this statue as an Attic original of the fourth century. This I think is 
impossible: not only is the working of the bronze against it, if one can 
judge by statuettes, especially the two early Hellenistic bronzes in Constan- 


® R. C. Bosanquet, ‘ Archaeology in Greece.’ 10 vy, Ausstellung von Fundstiicken aus Ephe- 
Vol. xx. p.179. - 808, p. 3. 


RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN ASIA MINOR. 347 


tinople," but the style of the statue is itself against this view. The face in 
profile is handsome and perhaps Praxitelean, but seen from the front it 
appears coarse, heavy, and flat. The hair is brushed up off the forehead in 
the typical Hellenistic manner which is apparently derived from Alexandroid 
heads, and is rendered by thickish curling locks heaped clumsily one on the 
other. The head itself is too big: and there is a swelling bar over the eyes 
which is not of fourth century modelling. Then the exaggeration of the 
muscles of the limbs and torso, especially on the chest where they detach 


Fic. 10. Fic. 11. 


themselves in great slabs, points to a Hellenistic origin. In my opinion this 
bronze is a Roman cast ” of the first century A.D. of a Hellenistic original of the 
later third century. 

Next come the two pieces of a bronze lampstand already described by 
Mr. Bosanquet in these pages,'* and now illustrated (Figs. 10 and 11). The 


Ἢ Joubin, Catalogue des Bronzs, Nos. 4and 5. 2 There is in the Museum at Cairo a piece of 
The working of the bronze is much nearer a Roman mould for casting a Polycleitan bronze ; 
(though of course not half so thick or clumsy) — v. Edgar, Cat. of Moulds, 
that of the bronze boy (Joubin, op. cit. No. 6) 18 op. cit. loc. cit. 
from Seletkeh. 


AA? 


348 ALAN J. Β. WACE 


delicacy and feeling with which the whole was executed leave no room for 
doubt that we have in these originals of the Hellenistic period. 
First of the marbles comes a fine female head (Fig. 12). This, though 


Fic. 12. Fie. 13. 


clearly Roman in workmanship, is from its severe style and restraint of execution 
an accurate and careful copy of an original of the middle of the fifth century. 


Fig. 14. Fic. 15. 


Though copied with such detail as to lose all spirit it nevertheless is 
of great interest and beauty: it bears some resemblance to the Hesperid on 
the Olympia metope. 


RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN ASIA MINOR. 349 


Number five is a male portrait as Hermes with wings attached to the head 
(Fig. 13). This according to Dr. von Schneider is of Polycleitan style. However, 
on examination nothing definitely Polycleitan 
appears. The hair though parted in the 
centre and carefully arranged along the 
forehead, is not rendered by fine close-lying 
curls, but in rather thick locks that stand 
out from the head: besides there is a broad 
flat bar which presses over the eyes at the 
outside corners and this is totally un-Poly- 
cleitan. The deep-set eyes, the weak chin, 
narrow jaw, and irresolute mouth with down- 
curving corners suggest a copy of a Hellen- 
istic portrait, perhaps of Antiochus IT. 

Number six is a late and clumsy Roman 
copy of a boy with a duck, clearly a long 
way after the style of Boéthus (Fig. 14): 
it resembles very closely the ‘Boy with a 
bird’ in the Vatican. 

Next is a marble head representing a Fie. 16. 
diademed goddess (Fig. 15). Its treatment 
is in general sketchy, but not without grace: it is ordinary Roman work 
of the first century. 

Number fourteen is also Roman, but of an entirely different style and 


character. It is an excellent portrait bust of the Hadrianic period repre- 
senting a priest of the cult of the Imperial house (Fig. 16). All minor 
details such as the eyebrows are closely rendered: but it is good and life- 
like in style. | 
Figures No. 17 and 18 represent two panels of the frieze of ‘ Hunting 
Erotes ᾿ also previously described by Mr. Bosanquet. 
Last of all is a piece of a most interesting relief which was found face 


~ 


—_——$____ 


14 op. cit. p. 10. The numbers cited are also those of the official catalogue. 


350 ALAN J. B. WACE 


downwards in the road before the theatre and used as a paving slab. 
It represents the upper half of an Amazon in the attitude of the Poly- 
cleitan statue (Fig. 19). It probably decorated an altar of the later Hellenistic 
period. For in spite of the excellent modelling of the nude part of the 
torso, the details of the face and head are not well rendered, and the 


drapery is clumsily and roughly cut by the drill: and in an earlier 
period more care would have been taken in the execution. Still it is 
most important to find at Ephesus, where the statue was set up, even a copy 


Fie. 19. 


in relief of the masterpiece of Polycleitus. Also deserving of mention is a 
colossal male head and torso from the theatre representing the Demos of 
Ephesus: an inscription found with it leaves no doubt as to its 
identification. 


351 


᾿ Ye 
RTH 


Ἵ ἂν 


rei in iy τς 
SS: LAY xs 
4 


(From Arch. Anz., 1902, p. 153.) 


Weg noch Didyma 


polis - ἵ 
Fic. 20. 


352 ALAN J, B. WACE 


Miletus.” (Fig. 20). 


Beyond the lake of Bafi a range of hills runs from Latmus on the south 
side of the Maeander in a general north-westerly direction. From the most 
northern point of this range two small hills united with the main range by 
a long low-lying isthmus project north-east towards the river, which now 
skirts their slopes. The most easterly of these two hills runs further north, 
and is broader but lower : between this and the higher hill is a swamp mark- 
ing the site of one harbour: east of the isthmus lay another harbour and 
west of it the other two separated by a narrow tongue of land. Further 
west. Lade, now a hill, no longer an island, rises from the fever-haunted 
marsh, 

On the south-west slope of the higher hill stands the theatre: it is a 
- building of the early Imperial period.and proves to be in a good state of 
preservation now it has been laid bare by Dr. Wiegand’s excavations, Two 
broad diazomata divide the whole auditorium: the lowest range of seats contains 
five cunei, the middle ten, and the uppermost twenty: it is calculated that 
the theatre would seat twenty-five thousand people. It does not rest in a 
recess of the hill, but is rather built out against it with great curved retain- 
ing walls the same height as the hill, springing out on either side. In the 
thickness of these walls great vaulted branching staircases lead up to the 
diazomata, to which access is obtained through vaulted passages (2°40 m. wide 
and 3:20 τὴ. high) running behind them their whole length and communicating 
with them by frequent openings. Outside the uppermost vaulted passage 
on the top of the hill there seems to have been a kind of ‘ foyer ? running round 
the theatre and entered by several small doors. The seats were of marble 
resting on a foundation of ‘opus incertum.’ The great staircases at either side 
are entered from the north-west and south-west, and north-east and south- 
east; the entrances being on a level with the terrace before the theatre. 
From these entrances staircases (4°05 m. wide and 10 m. high) lead to a wide 
landing, and from here a branch leads to the first diazoma. Farther up two 
branches lead—to take the western side as an example—north-west and 
north-east, and curving round enter the second diazoma from those directions. 
On the right of the north-west staircase (and on the left of the north-east) 
is a series of three large chambers in the wall with windows. Were these 
used for storerooms, or for criminals and the necessary wild beasts ? - On the 
top landing there is a row of marble chairs on either side; and all these 
vaulted staircases and chambers were well drained. The orchestra is marble- 
paved and lies 1°85 m. below the lowest row of seats: perhaps there was a 
low balustrade between the orchestra and the passage before the seats, but 
the pavement shews signs of alterations made at the time of the sinking of 
the orchestra. The cornice of the wall round the orchestra is decorated with 
an anthemion and egg and dart moulding ; the wall itself was marble coated 
and pierced by seven niches. As mentioned above, before the staircase 


18 Arch, Anz. 1902, p. 147 seg. 


RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN ASIA MINOR. 353 


entrances there was a wide marble paved terrace: this gave access to the 
logeion on the same level and also by descending staircases to the room 


below the logeion. The stage buildings themselves consist of a long skene 
on the level of the terrace and the lowest row of seats. This, though it had 
no ground floor, clearly possessed a second storey. Before this was the logeion 
on the same level supported by three rows of square pillars; the row next 
to the skene is engaged (Fig. 21). The room below the logeion opened on to 
the orchestra by three doors; of the logeion itself nothing remains. It is 
worth remarking that before the orchestra was lowered it was on the same 
level as the logeion and the two together were then larger than a semicircle. 
The wall in front of the room below the logeion has been raised and 
thickened to serve as a Byzantine fortification wall. Behind the skene is a 
complex of later buildings. 


Fic. 21.—West Enp oF STAGE Buripinc, MIvetus THFATRE. 


Further to the east below the theatre hill a trench reveals a street 
running southwards from the harbour towards the great southern gate. To 
the east of this street on the lowest slope of the hill is a theatre-shaped 
building of marble, which was, as shewn by inscriptions and other discovered 
objects, undoubtedly the Bouleuterion. Two flights of steps divided the 
seats into three cunei, and the ‘orchestra,’ nearly a perfect circle, is entered 
by four doors from the large colonnaded square in front. In this colonnaded 
square stood a great central altar decorated with a bucrania and garland 
ornament. Here were found fragments of two friezes, one mythological, 
and the other decorated with trophies of arms like the balustrade of the 
Pergamene Stoa. This latter belongs to the Corinthian propylaea of the 
square. From the unfortunately very fragmentary architrave inscription of 
the Bouleuterion Dr. Wiegand dates it from the reign of Seleucus IV 


. 


354 ALAN J. B. WACE 


(187-175 8.0.) or that of his immediate successor. Yet further east, and 
opposite to the Bouleuterion, stood a Nymphaeum which formed the end of 
the aqueduct from the Carian hills. It was in two storeys: the uppermost, 
which was cemented and served as the cistern, was supported on the vaulting 
of the lower. The outside was covered with marble and decorated with nine 
niches to each storey. Further, before each niche projected an entablature 
supported by red marble columns. North of the Bouleuterion square and 
towards the Harbour some water-filled trenches mark the position of the 
small! agora. For south of the Bouleuterion there has been discovered an 
enormous agora, which is not yet fully excavated, though some large sale 
rooms have been cleared. It seems to have been surrounded by a double 


Fic. 22.— MILerus, SoUTHERN GATE, 


In centre, pavement of Trajanic leveleabove late Hellenistic gate (wall visible either side). 
In right hand front corner entrance between towers of early Hellenistic period. 


colonnade, and to have been about 120m. across. Eastwards from the 
Nymphaeum and close to the edge of the Isthmus Dr. Wiegand has cleared 
the centre of some late Roman baths with a hypocaust of vaulted brick. 

But about the most important piece of work yet done is the complete exca- 
vation of the great south gate on the road to Branchidae (Fig. 22). Formerly 
the gate had only been cleared down to the level of 100 A.D., as shewn by an 
inscription of the time of Trajan. About a metre below this was found the 
remains of a late Hellenistic gate flanked on either side by two equal-sized 
rooms which later were converted into fountains. On the left of the entrance 
was a tower (10x 6m.): on the right the wall projects 5 metres in front of 
the line of the gate. Further outside this gate and not parallel to it lay a 


15 See plan, Arch. Anz. 1901, p. 196. 


᾿ 


RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN ASIA MINOR, 355 


yet earlier gate through which the road ran sideways into the city. It is 
flanked by two square towers, well built of squared masonry, and clearly is of 
the early Hellenistic period when Alexander the Great stormed the city in 
334 B.c. So five periods in the history of Miletus can be determined 
(1) Early Hellenistic; (2) Late Hellenistic ; (3) Trajanic, when the level 
of the streets was raised and drains were put down; (4) Reign of Gallienus, 
when the gaps in the wall were hastily repaired to resist the Goths; 
(5) Byzantine, as shewn by the fortifications on the theatre hill. 

Outside the gate Dr. Wiegand has found a street of tombs of all periods, 
chiefly Hellenistic: these however I was prevented from seeing. 

As one follows the line of the wall westwards, one comes to a trench 
that reveals an early circular Christian Church. Next is the western gate 
entered side-ways and guarded by a tower projecting from the wall; on the 
right of it and against the wall is a staircase 3m. broad which ascended to 
the top of the defences. The course of the wall can then be followed all along 
the west side. Northwards Dr. Wiegand has found the line of the great 
street (5m. wide with a sewer) from the theatre to the south-west gate: on 
either side are late houses. Then south of the theatre, by the ruins of a later 
building, a big trial pit shews the marble floor of a Hellenistic gymnasium 
with an inscription of the usual type cut on the pavement. ‘Also there was 
apparently a stoa west of the gymnasium. Besides this some trial pits and 
trenches cut on the east slope of the theatre hill and on the top of the other 
hill reveal portions of well drained streets and Roman houses, many paved 


with ordinary mosaic work. 
ALAN J. Β. WACE. 


THREE SCULPTURED STELAI IN THE POSSESSION OF LORD 
NEWTON AT LYME PARK. 


[Puates XI.—XIII.] 


THE recent Exhibition of works of Greek art held at the Burlington 
Fine Arts Club—although necessarily limited to comparatively small objects— 
has been sufficient to prove that the traditional wealth of our English 
collections of classical antiquities still remains a fact. The Exhibition, more- 
over, has had its use in eliciting information as to works of art on a larger 
scale, hitherto unknown and unrecorded, that had escapéd the vigilance of 
Waagen and of Conze, of Michaelis and of Furtwingler, and even of our 
English archaeologists. Thus it was that when the Exhibition was little 
more than planned I learnt from the well known sculptor, Countess Feodora 
‘Gleichen, that there existed at Lyme Park, Lord Newton’s Cheshire seat, 
three fine sculptured Stelai from the best period of Attic art. I am grateful 
to the owner for granting me permission to publish these inedited works 
in this Journal, which ought indeed to be the official gazette of the English 
collections. I have unfortunately been unable to avail myself as yet of 
Lord Newton’s further permission to study the originals. But as photo- 
graphs of the Stelai are now extant, I have thought it wiser not to postpone the 
publication for fear that it might be anticipated elsewhere. The information 
kindly given me by Lord Newton himself has facilitated the discussion and 
interpretation of the Stelai which, for the rest, are perfectly straightforward 
examples of their class. 


All three reliefs were brought from Greece by the great uncle of the 


present Lord Newton, the Mr. Thomas Legh who was one of the discoverers 
and part owners of the sculptures of Phigaleia ; he was himself a collector and 
became in 1816 a member of the Society of Dilettanti1 There can be little 
doubt that the Stelai were discovered by Mr. Legh himself during his stay at 
Athens in 1812, for in the account which he published of his travels? he 
states that he carried on an extensive excavation there and was ‘fortunate 


1 See Michaelis, Ancient Marbles in Great Legh, Esq., M.P. (John Murray 1817). 1812 ἱ 
Britain, § 88, p. 160. given as the date of the visit to Athens on p. 1. 
2 Narrative of a Jowrney in Egypt and the On p. 279, however, the excavation is referred 
Country beyond the Cataracts, by Thomas ἴο as taking place in May 1811. 


ΠῚ  PHREE SCULPTURED STELAI. 357 
enough to discover numerous vases, inscriptions, and bas-reliefs’. Of these 
bas-reliefs he publishes the one of the actor (below Fig. 2); the other two 
reliefs now at Lyme are not described, nor is it now known what became of 
the other ‘numerous’ objects excavated. (For one vase, however, see note 
10, below.) 


- 


Ι.---ΞΞ ΤΕ ΓΕ oF ΜΈΓΙΒΤΟ AND EPIGENES. (PL. XI.) 


- At first sight the most interesting and beautiful of the three reliefs is 
also the largest. Moreover, the rarity of these large sepulchral Stelai outside 
Athens confers upon it a special value.® It represents, within the usual 
Dorie aedicula, one of those family groups formerly known as ‘scenes of 
parting’ or else ‘of reunion,’ where wife and husband clasp hands in token 
of life-long union—with the not unfrequent addition, as here, of an attendant 
in the background. As usual in the freer style that obtained towards the 
close of the fifth century, the two principal figures project slightly beyond 
the framing pilasters. The height from the lower edge of the frame to the 
akroterion (now broken) is 4 ft. 104 in.; the width of the actual Stele, across 
the pilasters is 2 ft. 10} ins. ; the extreme width of the pediment is 2 ft. 11} ins. 
Below the akroterion, along the architrave, runs the inscription, after the 
pattern of countless others : 


Μελιστὼ Ἡγεστράτου ἐξ Οἴου ὅ ’Emvyévns Mixpiwvos ᾿Ελευσίνιος 


Melisto, daughter of Hegestratos, then, it is who sits to the spectator’s left, 
on a cushioned chair without back, leaning against the pilaster, her sandalled 
feet resting on a footstool. In accordance with the fashion that was popular 
in Athens from about 450 B.c.,° she wears the thin Ionic chiton with sleeves, 
under the thicker sleeveless Doric chiton, and over the whole the ample 
cloak or himation,’ one end of which she holds up with the fingers of her 
left hand. With her right hand she clasps the right of her husband 


_Epigenes, who stands facing her, seen in three quarters by the spectator, 


He is a bearded personage of mature age ; his costume is that of the ordinary 
Athenian citizen, namely the cloak draped over the left shoulder, leavin 
right shoulder and breast bare, in the manner familiar from Stelai and from 


τ the frieze of the Parthenon. His left arm and hand hang quietly at his side. 


If compared with similar personages on other tomb reliefs, it will be found 
that there is a certain individuality in the man’s head. 

Behind these two figures, and in much lower relief, stands a third—a 
female attendant carrying what must be her mistress’s jewel casket. Her 


3 The British Museum, for example, possesses δ For the Attic deme Οἷον see Wachsmuth, 
no example on this scale and the same might Stadt Athen II. p. 286. 


be said of most other Museums, excepting, of ὁ Furtwingler, Masterpieces of Greek Sculp- 


id coliection at Leyden. ture, p. 29. 
1 re pus examples of this class.of relief 7 The three garments are best seen on the 
" simi) a canpenions may be “found in figure of the beautiful stele from the Keramei- 
“ Altische Grabrelicfe’ 6 _. Κοβ, Conze, CLII (No. 805). 


358 EUGENIE STRONG 
head is shown in profile; her hair is cut short and she wears the sleeveless 
chiton, without any upper garment. 

The lower left-hand corner of the relief is broken away; from the shape 
of the breakage under the chair, one may conjecture that here was some such 
object as a wool basket, or perhaps a dog lying down. 

The features of Melisto are a good deal rubbed and defaced, though they 
are less so in the original, I am informed by Lerd Newton, than appears to be 
the case in the reproduction. The technique is not of the most refined, for 
between our Stele and such a masterpiece as the ‘ Hegeso,’ for instance, there 
is a great aesthetic gap; the relief doubtless bears the stamp of the workshop 
rather than of a masterhand, yet the general style is influenced by the great 
epoch, as the drawing of the heads, the poses, the arrangement and throw of 
the draperies with their folds represented by grooves, sufficiently indicate. A 
number of details were probably added in colour. The date is difficult to 
fix, but it may be roughly placed at about 420 B.c. 


IJ.—STELE oF ARKESIS. (PL. XII). 


Arkesis, a young mother holding in front of her her closely swaddled 
baby—symbol perhaps of the motherhood that has cost her life °— sits on a 
chair without back resting ber feet on a low footstool. Her hair, which is tied 
in a knot at the back, is confined in front by a fillet wound three times 
round the head. The dress is precisely similar to that worn by Melisto on 
the preceding stele. The subject is sculptured on a sunk panel ὃ which 
measures about 1 ft. 21 in. square, the total breadth of the stele being 1 ft. 
21 in., and its total height to the top of the akroterion 3 ft.11}in. The 
akroterion itself is composed of a high central palmette and two half palmettes 
at the sides, supported on volutes, which spring from a clump of akanthos 
foliage. This design is of frequent occurrence. On the field between 
akroterion and panel the name APKE€I¢ is inscribed. 

The work is somewhat rough-and superficial, but is of a good period, from 
the end of the fifth or beginning of the fourth century. 


IlI.—StTeELE oF AN Actor. (PL. XIII). 


This is the only one of the three reliefs at Lyme which was published by 
Mr. Thomas Legh in the book of travels already cited. He alludes to it as 
follows in a footnote on p. 22 : ‘the terra-cotta vase of extreme beanty ! and in [ 


8 For the subject cp. the stele at the Brit. 
Mus. (6 in the Phigaleian Room) of a young 
mother seated, and in front of her the nurse 
holding the well swaddled infant. 

9 This type and shape of stele is common— 
numerous examples in Conze op. cit. 

10 This vase (a pelike) is published by 


Stackelberg, Graber der Hellenen, ΤΊ. XVIII 
and is now in the Brit. Mus. ; on the obverse 
Zeus and Nike with their names inscribed stand 


on each side of a low altar; on the reverse ἃ 


female figure is moving away rapidly from 
another female figure who stands holding a 
sceptre. R.f. technique. A fanciful conjecture 


ΥΩ 4“ “iin ins > 
“ae τε ae 
Se) a “ἃ ; 
τ 
THREE SCULPTURED STELAI. 359 


a state of perfect preservation and the curious basso-rilievo of which en- 
gravings are given were found in the sepulchres we opened at a short 
distance from the walls of the city [Athens] on the western side of the road 
that leads to Thebes,’ On p. 288 he describes the relief as follows: ‘ The 
marble Basso-Relievo is probably the sepulchral monument of a comic poet ; 
or the two masks may possibly be, the one that of the Comic, and the other 
that of the Tragic, Muse. It was found in the same spot as the terra-cotta 
Vase described above, but has no inscription or any other sign on which to 
build a conjecture.’ 

'In a sense, this relief is, from its subject, the most interesting of the 
three under discussion. A young man draped in the himation that leaves 
bare the chest and the right arm and shoulder sits, facing to the right, on a 
chair with finely curved back. His drapery, which passes over his left shoulder 
is twisted about the left wrist and then hangs down: the left hand clutches 
the drapery on the lap. In his right hand the man holds a comic mask 
which he gazes at intently; in the field above, on the left, hangs a second 
| mask. The masks and the man’s head are somewhat defaced. The slab is 

broken ; its breadth is 2 ft. 11 in., its present height 3 ft. 8} in. 

Elderly men are not unfrequently represented seated, on grave-reliefs, 
but the seated youthful male figure is of comparatively rare occurrence, and 
in all known cases pose and even gesture seem adapted from the position 

| so familiar on the stelai of girls and women. The present example recalls 
the beautiful relief at Grotta Ferrata! of a young man reading in a roll with 
his book case at his feet. Were it not that the place of its discovery shows 
the relief to be from a grave, one might have conjectured that it was votive 
rather than sepulchral ; it offers striking analogy to the well known Hellenistic 
relief in the Lateran (Helbig, Fiihrer No. 684) representing an actor (more 
probably than a poet’) studying the mask which, like the actor on our 
relief, he holds in front of him, while two other masks and an open roll lie on 
a table opposite. In fact, in spite of the difference of scale and though the 
sides are reversed, the actors of the Attic and of the Helienistic relief have 

| identically the same pose and gesture. It may be that the scheme was 
traditional and that the relief at Lyme is one of its earliest examples. Any- 
how this representation of an actor seeking inspiration for the part he is to 
act from the study of his mask 138 forms a welcome addition to the class of 
reliefs which throw light upon ancient dramatic art." 

ΕυσέΝΙΕ Srrone. 


as to the ashes which the vase contains is put 
forward by Mr. Legh. It perhaps belonged 


originally to Mr. Forster, co-proprietor with | 


Legh, Cockerell, and others in the Phigaleian 
frieze. Then it passed into the possession of 


νὴ the Rev. W. Wood of Fulham. In 1895 
it was for the British Museum, at a 
Φ Ν ΞΡ αὖ M οὶ a 


Rises Ei CR (io. 638). ~ re 


12 Reisch, Griechische Weihyeschenke, p. 54. 

181 have no doubt that this motif, which 
Reisch att:ibuted to the actor in the Lateran 
relief, is also that of our stele. 

ΜῈ Studniczka’s interesting paper on the 
Actor relief from the Peiraeus (Mélanges Perrot, 
Ρ. 307 ff.), though not bearing exactly on the 
relief now published, must at any rate be men- 
tioned in this connection. 


NOTICES OF BOOKS. 


Investigations at Assos. Drawings and Photographs made during the Excavations 
1881-1882-1883. By J.T. CuarKke, F. H. Bacon, R. Konpewery. Edited with 
explanatory notes by F.H. Bacoy. Cambridge, Mass. [Published by the Archaeolo- 
gical Institute of America.] First Part—to be completed in 5 parts at $5 each. 


This long-expected publication of the American excavations at Assos consists of maps and 
plans, architectural drawinys, photographs, and inscriptions. In the text there is little or 
nothing new ; the narrative of the expedition and the inscriptions being merely repeated 
from the “ Papers of the American School at Athens.” The descriptions appended to the 
plates are very slight and there is no discussion of date or other questions. The plates 
themselves are on a large scale, and finely executed. The First Part, the only one as yet 
published, contains maps and plans of Assos and the surrounding district, of the Agora, 
the great Stoa and the Bouleuterion, together with inscriptions and vases found on the 
sites. Among these is an interesting study of the construction of the Stoa by Mr. Kolde- 
wey. Part II. is to contain the baths and heroén, the mosaic pavements, the theatre, the 
Greek bridge, and the Roman atrium ; Part III. the temple and sculptures, the fortifica- 
tion walls and gateways, and the gymnasium ; Part IV. the tombs and mausoleums ; Part 
V. the tom)s and objects found in them, figurini, coins, vases, Byzantine mosaics, and the 
Turkish mosque ; to these will be added an index and table of contents to the whole. 


Troja und Ilion. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen in den vorhistorischen und histori- 
schen Schichten von Ilion, 1870-1894. Von WILHELM DORPFELD. 2 vols. 76 plates, 
471 illustrations in text. Athens: Beck and Barth. 1902. 40m. 


The definitive publication of the Trojan excavations has now appeared in a form at once 
convenient and complete ; it will of course be indispensable to students. The numerous 
illustrations and plans make it easy to follow the descriptions throughout. Nearly half 
the book is written by Prof. Dérpfeld, including the history of the excavations, the detailed 
architectural description of the various strata and the buildings they contain, and a final 
discussion of Homeric Troy and its neighbourhood in relation to the Iliad. The clearness 
of the architectural description with its plans and diagrams is increased by the addition 
of small letters inserted in the photographic blocks, with references printed below. In 
this way the reader is never in doubt as to the identity of the various structures represented. 
even in the more complicated views. It has perhaps never been possible before, even for 
those who have not visited a site, to realise so fully its appearance and the relative posi- 
tion of its various remains. In the last chapter Prof. Dérpfeld identifies the topography 
of the Iliad with an amount of detail not generally attempted. The several other chapters 
are assigned to specialists: H. Schmidt writes on the pottery, A. Gétze on smaller objects 
of various materials, H. Winnefeld on works of sculpture of later age, and also on the 
graves and tumuli, A. Briickner on the inscriptions, mainly of Hellenistic and Roman age, 
and also on the history of Troy and Ilion, H. von Fritze on the coins of Ilion. Though 
so many collaborators have been employed, the whole work is so concise as to be con- 
tained in two volumes of moderate size. Yet all that is essential to our knowledge of Troy 
seems to be included. The only regret is that Schliemann did not survive to see so worthy 
a monument of the excavations that were the chief aspiration of his life. 


᾿ 


NOTICES OF BOOKS 361 


Das Athener Nationalmuseum. Phototypische Wiedergabe seiner Schiitze. By 
J. N. Svononos. Heft 1. Pp. 16 and 10 plates. Athens: Beck & Barth, 1903. 
6 m. 80. 


This is the first part of a work, which, if it is carried out, will be of great importance. It 
is proposed’to issue about six to eight parts each year, which will give some sixty to eighty 
plates of objects in the Athenian Museum, and which will be accompanied by a com- 
mentary by Mr. Svoronos. The objects are to be treated in groups, such as sculptures, 
bronzes, vases, terracottas, etc. Inscriptions and objects of the Mycenaean period are 
excluded. The first part is occupied with the bronzes of Antikythera, and the text gives 
a full account of the diving operations. 


Die Skulpturen des Pergamon-Museums in Photographien. 33 plates. 
Berlin : G. Reimer, 1903. 45 m. 


A portfolio of thirty-three unmounted platinotypes of the Pergamon Museum at Berlin and 
its sculptures, which will be of service in the continued absence of an adequate publication 
of the collection. The series includes the restored orders of the temple of Athene at 
Priene, and of the temple of Artemis at Magnesia on the Maeander. 


Recueil de Tétes antiques ideales ou idéalisées. By Satomon Rernacu. Pp. 
vii + 230. 276 plates, and 18 illustrations. Paris : Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 1902. 
20 f. 


M. Reinach publishes in this volume a collection of some 250 heads, of an ideal or semi- 
ideal character, arranged as far as possible in chronological order, and accompanied by a 
full commentary, with references to earlier literature. The heads are for the most part 
such as would be found in a gallery of casts, but some are unfamiliar, and welcome. 

The author justly claims that his book is inexpensive, but it may be doubted whether 
the method of reproduction employed (tracings from photographs on paper prepared for 
process work) is satisfactory. The contours are well and carefully rendered, but the 
surface texture is flat and wanting in detail. The plates may be said to have the same 
relation to photographs that casts have to original marbles. 


Greek Moulds. [Catalogue général des Antiquités Egyptiennes du Musée du Caire.] 
By C.C. Epaar. Pp. xvii+ 89. 33 plates. Cairo: Service des Ant. de l’Egypte. 
1902, (84 fr. 60). 


A catalogue of the plaster and clay moulds in the Cairo Museum, used in the manufacture 
of bronzes and terracottas. The moulds for bronzes form by far the larger and more 
interesting part of the collection, as they not only comprise some charming fragments of 
later Greek Art, but are also important from their bearing on ancient bronze-casting. Mr. 
Edgar gives reasons for supposing that the bulk of the moulds come from factories at 
Mit Rahineh (Memphis) and assigns them generally to the Roman period, while a com- 
parison with Alexandrian coin types of the second century A.D. affords a closer date for 
some of the fragments. 

The major part of the introduction is devoted to a very careful discussion of the 
technical processes employed in making and using these moulds in bronze-casting. 
Almost all are piece-moulds of plaster and Mr. Edgar concludes that they were not 
used in the actual casting, but for making the perishable moulds (loam or wax) in which 
this was done and which are destroyed in the operation. 


H.S.—VOL, XXIII. BB 


362 NOTICES OF BOOKS 


Little is to be learned from literary sources on this subject. Pollux (x. 189) certainly im- 
plies that some form of the process known as ‘cire perdue,’ was known to the ancients, but 
it is much too troublesome for everyday use. 

Mr. Edgar also discusses the methods used in making terracottas. His moulds are 
usually bipartite, fitted with mortises and tenons and made of plaster—in which two 
latter points they differ from the moulds used for Greek terracottas, which have, almost 
always, smooth edges, and are made of clay. As Mr. Edgar rightly observes, the two 
halves of a cast from a mortised mould must have been joined in the mould, and the cast 
withdrawn whole, like a bronze casting, whereas in Greek terracottas the halves are 
joined by hand, after withdrawal from the mould. Three hundred and sixty-six moulds 
are described, and the more important are figured in the plates. 


Studia Pontica. Vol. i. A Journey of Exploration in Pontus, By J. G. CG 
ANDERSON. Pp. 104, Nine coloured maps and sixteen illustrations, mainly from 
author’s photographs. Brussels: H. Lamertin, 1903. 7 fr. 50. 


This is the first fascicule of four which are to form a single volume, embracing the 
ancient topography, the epigraphic remains, and the history of Roman Pontus. By a rare 
and welcome agreement the eminent Belgian explorer, M. Franz Cumont, is collaborating 
with Mr. Anderson, each author using his native tongue. The second and fourth fascicules 
will be by M. Cumont: the third (the inscriptions), by both authors : the first, now before 
us, is by Mr. Anderson alone. It narrates.a methodical exploration, carried out in 1899, in 
south-western and south-central Pontus. The main lines of communication were 
followed, ancient sites visited, and modern villages ransacked for monuments with that 
indefatigable care which Prof. W. M. Ramsay has taught his pupils to use. The principal 
results (some have been already provisionally published) are the tracing of part of the 
imperial highways, from Caesarea to Amisus, and from Ancyra by way of Andrapa and 
Neocaesarea to Satala and the sources of Euphrates. The latter, though perhaps hardly 
to be styled “the great trans-Asiatic road,’ was among the most important of Roman 
highways in the East, and continued to be a main route of war and trade all through the 
Middle Ages. Among sites that Mr. Anderson identified or finally fixed are those of 
Etonea, Mithridation—Euagina, Eupatoria—Magnopolis, and Andrapa—Neoclaudiopolis, 
(with Phazimon—Neapolis). He assigns likely sites to various minor places, and discusses 
the authorities, with which he shows singularly full acquaintance. He makes much the 
same use of the Peutinger Table as Prof. Ramsay, occasionally yielding to the temptation 
to juggle with its names and numerals. May we express a hope that there will be uni- 
formity in the orthography of place-names in all the fascicules? We already note that 
Tokat is likely to reappear as Tokad. 


Asia Minor. By J. G. C. Axperson (Murray’s Handy Classical Maps), with indies: 
London : John Murray, 1903. 1s. 


This is a map of Asia Minor, Cyprus, and North Syria as far east as parallel 42°, projected 
on a scale of 1 : 2,500,000, and contoured by thousand foot intervals, above 1000 feet, and, 
below that standard to sea-level and 600 feet. The levels are differentiated in tint with 
the clearness characteristic of Messrs. Bartholomews’ best work. Modern names, wherever 
identifications are certain, appear in italics within brackets. Roads of different classes are 
distinguished, and provincial boundaries and names, as they were at the death of Nero 
are printed in red. The Troad appears in an inset, doubled in scale. The detail is as 
accurate as it can be made in a country, little of which has been accurately surveyed. 


NOTICES OF BOOKS 363 


Antike Schlachtfelder in Griechenland. Bausteine zu einer antiken Kriegsge- 
schichte. Von J. KromAyer. Band I: von Epaminondas zum Eingreifen der Romer, 
Pp. x+352. 6 Lithographic maps, 4 Photographic Plates, 3 Sketches in Text. 
Berlin : Weidmann, 1903. 12 m. 


This book is based on an expedition to Greece, and an examination of various sites made 
in the spring of 1900. Eighty-eight pages are devoted to Mantinea (362 B.c.), 62 to 
Chaeronea (338 Β.0.), 69 to Sellasia (221 8.0.), and 30 to Mantinea (207 B.c.). Special 
attention is given in each case to the strategy of the whole campaign as well as to the 
battle itself, and interesting estimates are given of the strength of the forces engaged. The 
book is written from a more definitely military point of view than most works of the kind. 
It is dedicated to the Chief of the General Staff of the German Army, and is written in 
collaboration with two of its members. The author believes-that the military operations 
of antiquity are useful for the practical study of modern strategy and tactics, and his 
Introductory and Concluding Chapters, on the general points of interest brought out by 
these particular battles, are well worth reading. Some careful work is also done on the 
Chronology of the Campaigns. The book ends with seven pages explanatory of the Maps 
and Photographs, and 4 pages of Bibliography. It should be remarked that 5 of the litho- 
graphic maps are only adapted from the best existing maps: that of Sellasia is based on an 
original survey. 


Geschichte der griechischen und makedonischen Staaten seit der Schlacht 
bei Chaeronea. Von B. ΝΊΕΒΕ. 3 Teil: von 188 bis 120 v. Chr. Pp. xi+468. 
Gotha : Perthes. 1903. 12 m. 


The third and concluding volume of Niese’s work brings the history of the Greek and 
Macedonian States down to 120 B.c. The choice of the stopping-point is dictated by 
external reasons only : space-limits, and the desire to avoid plunging too deeply into what 
is regarded as merely Roman history. In other words, one more historian of Greece (or 
his publisher) has lost heart on the threshold of the period which cries aloud to be dealt 
with anew. Like the preceding volumes, this contains a careful, more or less annalistic 
treatment of the period, from one point of view only. All the non-political elements, all 
the wider issues of history, social problems, the progress of culture, etc., are practically 
excluded. Thus we have indeed a history of the Greek States, and their political squabbles, 
not a history of Greece ; for the only unifying element in the Greek world at this time 
was Greek culture, and of this we are told little or nothing. Doubtless it was necessary to 
bring the writer's task into a possible compass ; and as a bare record of historical ‘events ’ 
this volume is no less useful than its predecessors. A short appendix sums up the chief 
recent contributions to the chronology of the whole period. A fuller list of additions and 
corrections, bringing volumes I and II up to date, was to be expected (e.g. it is not noted 
that C.I.A. II 184 has been shown to have nothing to do with the Lamian War). There 
are no genealogical tables. The index is adequate and useful. 


Les Phéniciens et 1’ Odyssée. I. By Victron Bérarp. Pp. vii +-591. . Many 
illustrations, photographic views of localities and reproductions of charts. Paris : 
' Armand Colin, 1902. 25 fr. 


The fluent author of many modern political studies and of “ L’origine des Cultes ἜΕΙΕ - 
here comes forward as champion of the Semites against the author of “ Le Mirage oriental.” 
Bringing to his task considerable acquaintance with the Levant coasts, M. Victor Bérard 
tries to re-establish the Phoenicians by a minute analysis of the: topographical and social 
evidence contained in a part of the Odyssey. He would show (1) that the poem displays 
intimate local knowledge of the Mediterranean coasts from Sidon to the Ocean. (2) That 
such knowledge is only consistent with Phoenician ideas as they might have been set 
BB 2 
+ 


364 NOTICES OF BOOKS 


forth in a Semite’s Periplus. After an introduction on ‘Topology’—a name proposed for 
the science of the interrelation of localities and events—M, Bérard examines the ‘Tele- 
macheia’ at great length, satisfying himself that the Pylos of the poem is the site of 
Samikon near Kyparissia, and that the Pherae of Diocles was not in Messenia, but on the 
Arcadian border at the later Alipherae. Then with much ingenuity, but by a rather 
circular process, he argues that Telemachus’ route presupposes both Phoenician thalasso- 
cracy, and Phoenician transit trade. The Semitic seamen’s Paradise he finds in the district 
of Megara-Nisaea ; “Syria” in Syra; the city of Alcinous on a west Corfiote site near 
Palaeo-kastrizza ; Ithaca, not in Leukas, but in Ithaka, There is little novelty in all 
this, beyond the abundance, even redundancy, of detail with which the author’s theories 
are supported. But the most startling contention in the book is the situation proposed 
for Calypso’s 1516. That wooded well-watered retreat is found in the woodless waterless 
islet of Peregil, lying west of Ceuta under the highest peak of the Sierra Bullones, the 
Monkey Mountain, which, for M. Berard, is the African Pillar of the Sky. To take such 
a mean and barren isle of difficult approach as well known to the Phoenician mariners, 
and having been adopted as a Paradise from their accurate Periplus by a poet, who, it is 
maintained, always describes realities, is, to say the least, inconsistent. ‘There is much 
interesting comment in the book, drawn from the author’s knowledge of literature and 


the localities. Of prehistoric Aegean antiquities he takes practically no account at all. 


Perhaps their relation to his enquiry is to be treated in the seven parts, which will form 


the second volume. A 


Macedonian Folklore. By G.F. Assporr, Pp. x +372. Cambridge : University 
Press, 1903. 9s. net. 


Folklorists will welcome these gleanings from a rich and little explored field. Mr, Abbott’s 
account of peasant life in Macedonia with its seasonal festivals, and innumerable supersti- 
tions in which Paganism and Christianity are quaintly blended, makes pleasant reading. 
The general reader will be chiefly impressed by the extraordinary universality of certain 
practices and beliefs ; exact parallels from the ends of the earth are quoted by the author 
for many of the customs and proverbs he has collected, and many more might have been 
adduced from ancient Greece alone. From the point of view of Hellenic studies, the most 
interesting chapters are those devoted to the ‘‘ Folk Calendar,” and “ the Seasons,” and that 
on ‘Spirits and Spells.” The last shows that the belief in wood and water nymphs 
remains deeply rooted in the popular mind ; the Olympians have vanished, but the Dryads 
and the Nereids still hold their own in this out-of-the-way corner of Europe. 


Etudes de Littérature et de Rhythmiquegrecques. Par Henri ve Membre 
de l'Institut. 240 pp. Paris: Hachette et Cie, 1902. 5 ἢ, 


M. Weil has here gathered up a number of articles in which, with a freshness of interest 
remarkable in a veteran scholar, he has welcomed and assisted to interpret some of the recent 
discoveries in the sphere of Greek literature. The book falls into two parts. The first 
contains short studies of two dramatic fragments among the Amherst Papyri ; a fifth century 
vellum fragment of the Birds of Aristophanes (11. 1057-1085, 1101-1127), recently acquired 
by the Louvre ; the Strassburg prologue to a drama of the New Comedy, originally edited by 
Kaibel ; four hymns from Delphi ; the additional fragments of the eighth mime of Herondas ; 
the incomplete romance of Ninus, published by Wilcken ; and a few other such pieces. 
The second part includes a number of notes and essays upon metrical points, originally 
written at various times in the last forty years, but now revised and brought up to date 
with reference to the most recent accessions of material. In the present chaotic state of 
metrical theory, it is useful to have these essays, which maintain an attitude different from 
that of the recently dominant school of Westphal, but practically cath cinent with that of 
Blass, Wilamowitz and other modern scholars. : 


i ee ee ek - 


* 


NOTICES OF BOOKS 365 


Greek Papyri from the Cairo Museum together with Papyri of Roman 
Egypt from American Collections. [Preprint from vol. v. of the Decennial 
Publications of the University of Chicago, 1902.] 78 pp. 6s, 


Mr, Goodspeed’s volume contains (1) fifteen papyri from the Cairo Museum, (2) twelve 
from a collection made by the Rev. J. R. Alexander and deposited by him in the Museum 
of Westminster College, New Wilmington, Pennsylvania, and (3) three, one being of great 
length, from the editor’s own collection. Two of the Cairo papyri are literary, one, of the 
second century, containing portions of Od. xv. 216-231, 239-253, in which an obelus 
stands against 251 and a διπλῆ against 247 and 250 ; the other is a small metrical fragment, 
of the same date. The remainder are miscellaneous documents, ranging from the middle 
of the third century B.c. to A.D. 362. Of the Alexander papyri nine are receipts for seed- 
corn advanced by the sitologi of Karanis in a.p. 158-9. Of the editor’s own papyri one 
is apparently a passenger’s boat-ticket, another is a record of legal proceedings with regard 
to the will of a soldier, Amatius Priscus, presumably the father of the Amatia Prisca 
mentioned in Brit. Mus. Pap. 470; and the third is an account of private receipts and 
expenditure, in forty-seven columns, covering seven months from October 191 to April 
192. The texts are printed with accents, stops, etc., and are provided with short introduc- 
tions and notes, and full indices, which add greatly to-the value of any publication of 
papyri, making it easy to survey in the first instance and to refer to afterwards. 


Homerische Palaste: eine Studie zu den Denkmialern und zum Epos. By Ferp. 
Noack. Pp. 100. Leipzig: Teubner, 1903. 


In this small monograph Dr. Noack discusses first the relation between the ground plans 
of the royal prehistoric buildings discovered on the Greek mainland and at Troy, and 
those of the Palaces of Cnossus and Phaestus. He calls attention to important differences 
between the two groups, e.g. the relation of the Megaron to the smaller chambers ; the 
division of the facade ; the choice of a long or short side for the front ; the simplicity or 
complexity of the room arrangement. He concludes that there were distinct types of 
‘ Aegean’ Palace, northern and southern ; that these had developed very differently, the 
first from the simple one-roomed house, traces of which can be seen at Troy, the second 
from Eastern buildings. The former type alone influenced later Greek architecture, 
and may be seen in the ordinary Temple scheme of classical times : the latter, though 
belonging to the home of ‘ Mycenaean’ art, died out. Further, in a section devoted to 
the Homeric Palace, the author contends that neither the northern nor the southern type, 
described above, answers to the Homeric type. Finally he discusses the ‘Temple Fagade’ 
fresco discovered at Cnossus in Mr. Evans’ first season and published in this Journal. 


For other works received see List of Accessions to the Library. 


ERRATUM, 
P. 441]. 3: for Tanais read Tomi. 


rs 


J. Η.8. VOL. XXIII (1903) PL. x. 


~ 
a 


VP bdag* asi 


β- 

= )Ὲ 

. 

Γ: 
iy = 
=. 
a \ete 


αἴ AR 
gk si ey 
4 ἃ 


δ 4 ἬΝ" A ; > «Ὁ: 7] 


ALEXANDRIAN HEXAMETER FRAGMENT 


J.H.S, VOL. XXII (1903) PL. XI. 


STELE OF MELISTO AND EPIGENES., 


J. Η. 8. νοι. XXIII. 4,903). PL. ΧΙ, 


., τῷ 
pe 


STELE OF ARKESIS, 


ων 


ΤΕ Amey, 


PL. ΧΗΙ, 


J. Η. 8. VOL. XXIII. (1903), 


STELE OF AN ACTOR, 


INDEX TO VOLUME XXIII. 


I.—INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 


A 


ACHILLES PonTaRrcHEs at Olbia, 45 f. ; island 
of, ibid. 

Actor, stele of, 358 f. 

Agias of Lysippus, 127 f. 

Agorai of Pergamum, 335 f. 

Aidinjik (Cyzicus), inscriptions from, 80 f. 

Alexander, brother of Laodice, non-existence 
of, 116 

Alexandria, terracotta cart from, 142 

Alexandrian Hexameter Fragments, 237 f. 

Alexandria Troas, Seleucid coins of, 101; 
Antiochus Hierax and, 116 

Alsos Hecates in Crimea, 46 

Amazon relief from Ephesus, 350 

Anatomy, treatment of, in Cerigotto statues, 
219 f. 

Antiochus, early Seleucid coins bearing the 
name, 92 f. 

Antiochus I., coinage of, 107 ἔν 

Antiochus IT., coinage of, 108 f. 

Antiochus V., coins of, 113 

Antiochus Hierax, coinage and history of, 
107 

Antiochus, son of Antiochus III., 112 

Antiochus, son of Seleucus III., non- 
existence of, 111 

Apene, 141, 143 

Aphrodite: at Olbia, 24 f.; temple at 
Peiraeus, 24; d ἐμ βάσσαις, 25; 
᾿Απάτουρος, 25 f. ; Ταμοστόλος 239, 242 ; 
Εὔπλοια, 24; Navapyis, 25 ; Οὐρανία, 26 
f. ; Pandemos, 26 f. 

Apollo: at Cyzicus, 88 f. ; Castellani head, 
120 ; Citharoedus, sacrifice to (Cyzicus), 


87; Citharoedus of Vatican, type of 


head, 123; Kpareavds (sacrifice to), 87 f. ; 
Mausoleum head, 121 f.; Oldfield head, 
117 f.; Pourtales head, ibid. ; of Tenea, 
228 ; ἀρχηγέτης, 88 ; Tadoxwpeirns, 88 

Apoxyomenos of the Vatican not ~Lysippic, 
130 

Ares at Olbia, 42 

Argive school of sculpture, 223 f. 


Aristogeiton, head on statue of, at Naples, 
221 

Aristotle (Pol. 1302 b, 1304 b) on Megarian 
history, 5 

Arkesis, stele of, 358 

Armed race, 269 f. 

Arsinoe, wife of Philadelphus, poem refer- 
ring to, 239 

Artaki (Cyzicus), inser. from, 87 

Artemis at Olbia, 28 f. ’Ayporépa, 28 

Asclepiadae at Cyzicus, 89 

Asklepios at Cyzicus, 79, 90; at Olbia, 44 

Astragalizon (?) from Cerigotto, 232 

Athena: Ergane, likna with _ firstfruits 
erected to, 298 ; at Olbia, 30 f.; head on 
Olbian coins, 31 f. ; Σώτειρα, 30 

Athens, antiquities at: statues from 
Cerigotto, 152 f., 217 f. ; r.f. pyxis with 
marriage-scenes, 132 f.; b.f. pinax with 
cart, 143 ; Cyprus terracotta cart 140. 

Athlete, bronze, from Cerigotto, 222 ; from 
Ephesus, 346 

Attic fresco- and vase-painting, technique 
compared with Cnossian, 200, 202 

Axe, double, on Cnossian ware, 203 f.; on 
Zakro ware, 255 f. 


B 


BANQUET-RELIEF from Cyzicus, 79 

Barbottine ware from Zakro, 259 

Beer-Dionysus, 323 

Berlin Museum: Corinthian pinax with 
cart, 139; vases with racing-scenes, 271, 
276 f., 286; coins of Olbia, 42, 51; 
Seleucid coins, 94 f. 

Bevelled edge on Greek coins, 105 

Bird-fresco at Cnossus, 198 

Block wheel, 145 

Borysthenes, R., cult at Olbia, 50 f.; head 
on cvins, ibid. 

Bouleuterion at Miletus, 353 f. 


Bourguignon skyphos with hoplitodromos, 


283 ; amphora with hoplitodromos, 287 
Boy with duck, from Ephesus, 349 


370 


Braziers, pottery, from Zakro, 258 

British Museum: head and shoulder of 
Apollo from Mausoleum, 121 f.; b.f. 
vase with marriage-procession (B 174), 
315 f.; vases with foot-race: (B 628), 272 ; 
(E 6), 273; (E 22), 288; (E 78), 285 ; 
(E 818), 285 ; Chalcidian vase with rustic 
cart (B 17), 189; Panath. amphora with 
chariot-race (B 130), 143; archaic plate 
with sacrifice of goat, 138; Etruscan 
bronze (Demeter in cart), 135; terra- 
cotta plaque with Dionysus in liknon, 
295; Alexandrian terracotta cart, 142 ; 
marble votive disk, 318 note; coins of 
Olbia, 33, 34; Seleucid coins, 97 f. 

Bromios, Dionysus, 323 

Biigelkannen fiom Zakro, 257 f. 

Bull on Olbian coins (Borysthenes 1), 50 


C (see also K) 


CaBEIRI, cult at Olbia, 44 

Cabeiric vases with rustic carts, 137, 138 

Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum: kylix 
with hoplitodromos, 286; Pashley 
Sarcophagus, 296, 322 ; votive disk, 319 ; 
Seleucid coin 99 ; Cretan θυρνάκι, 808 ἢ ; 
modern winnowing-basket, 299 

Cart, country, of ancient Greece, 132 f. 

Catchword theory of the Theognidea, 12 f. 

Cerigotto, bronze statues from, xxxviii, 152 f., 
ANY fae 

Chariot 
132 f. 

ee Palace at, 327 f.; pottery of, 
1071. 

Coins: Crannon (car), 149; Etruria (wheel), 
147; Hadriani (liknon), 295; Messana 
and Rhegium (car), 143 ; Nicaea (liknon), 
295; Olbia, 30 f.; Seleucid (βασιλέως 
᾿Αντιόχου), 92 f.; Thraco-Macedonian 
(cart), 144 

Comedy, Megarian, 5 

Cook, Sir Fredk., kylix with hoplitodromoi, 
288 ἢ, 

Corinthian pinax with cart, 129 

Cotys, S. Julius, at Cyzicus, 91 

- Cradle, liknon used as, 294 

Crannon, coins with sacred car, 149 

Crescent motive in Cnossian pottery, 178 f. ; 
with disk in relief on Zakro ware, 254 

Crete, dominance of, in ‘ Mycenaean’ style, 
199; see also Cnossus, Palaikastro, 
Zakro 

Cross-bar wheel, 145 

Curse on sacrilege, 8% 

Curves in Greek art, analysis of, xxxvii. 

Cybele, stelae with, from Cyzicus, 80, 82 

Cyprus: terracotta carts from, 140, 141 

Cyrnus, friend of Theognis, 1 ἢ, 

Cythera—see Cerigotto 

Cyzicene staters at Olbia, 31 

Cyzicus, inscriptions from, 74 f. 


used for 


wedding-processions, 


INDEX TO VOLUME XXIII. 


D - 


DELPHI, copy of Agias of Lysippius at, 127 


Democracy at Megara, 3 f. 


_ Diadumenos of Delos, 223 f. 


Diaulos, 261 f. 

Dies, duration of, in ancient coins, 99 f. 
alteration of, 102 

Dionysus ; at Olbia, 41; travelling-car of, 
144 ; use of liknon in his mysteries, 317 f.; 
“Apetos, 41 ; Liknites, 294 ὴ ᾿ 

Dioscuri, cult at Olbia, 43 f. 


Disk, votive, with liknophoria, 318 f. ; disk - 


and crescent on Zakro ware, 254 
Dolichodromoi on vases, 268 f. 


E 


Eeypt, relations with Crete, 163 f., 182 f., 
201; imported pottery in, 163 f., 182 f. ; 
pottery with white-filling from, 159 

Ephesus, recent excavations at, 340 f. 

Epidaurus, race-course at, 264 ἢ, 

Epigenes and Melisto, stele of, 357 

Eretria. marriage-pyxis from, 132, 150 

Erotes hunting, frieze from Ephesus, 349, 
350 

Etruscan coin with cross-bar wheel, 147 

Eumenes 11., his wall at Pergamum, 336 f. 

Euphronius kylix with armed foot-race, 
278 

Eyebrows, treatment of, in Greek sculpture, 
220 


F 


‘Fan,’ mystic, 292 

Fertility, use of liknon to promote, 314 f. 

Finland, winnowing instruments from, 
308 f. 

Firstfruits carried in liknon, 296 f. 

Fish-fresco at Cnossus, 189 

Florence, Mus. Civ., blue glass amphora with 
scene of initiation, 320, 322 * 

Flower, conventionalised, in Mycenaean 
ornament, 253, 254 

Foot-race, the Greek, 261 f, 

Fork, winnowing, 304 f. 

‘Fruit-stand ’ Minoan vases, 174 


G 


GatE, southern, of Miletus, 354 
Gentinus, a Seleucid Mint ? 102 


Geometric ware (pre-historic), from Cnossus, 


169 f. ; from Melos, 170 , 


Glasgow (Hunter Mus.), Seleucid coins at, 


Glaze of Cnossian pottery, 162 
pottery, 248 f. — 

Gorgoneion on Olbian coins, 32 

Gotha, Seleucid coin at, 99 

Gymnasia at Pergamum, 338 


f.; of Zakro 


INDEX OF SUBJECTS. " $71 


H 


Havrianti, coin with Hermes in liknon, 
295 

Hague, the, Seleucid coins at, 95 

Hair, treatment of in Cerigotto statues, 218 

τ f., 221, 234 

Handle inside vase from Zakro, 250 

Harbours of Ephesus, 343, 345 

Hauser Colleciion, vase with jumping-scene, 
272 

Heats in Greek races, 266 

Hecate, at Zeleia (relief), 86 

Helios cult at Olbia, 42 

Heracles: cult at Olbia, 48; poplar- 
crowned, 129 ; of Lansdowne House, 128 ἢ, 

Hermes : cult at Olbia, 39 f. ; statues from 
Cerigotto, xxxviii, 217 f., 226 f. ; of Praxi- 
teles, 154, 218 f.; in liknon, 294 ἢ ; 
porirait-head as, 348, 349 ; ’Ayopaios, 39 

Hexameter Fragments, Alexandrian, 237 f. 

Hippodrome type of race-course, 261 f. 

‘Hole-mouth’ vases from Zakro, 249 f., 257 

Homer, Od. xxii, 126-177, commented on 
325 f. 

Homeric House, 325 f. ; race, 261 

Hoplitodromoi on vases, 269 f. 

Horns vf Consecration on Cnossian pottery, 
203 f. 

Horse grazing, mint-mark of Alexandria 
Troas, 101 

Horseman and dog relief from Cyzicus, 84 

House, the Homeric, 325 f. 

Humorous representationsof Greek athletics, 
273, 291 


I 


Iaccuvs, vannus of, 293 f., 317 f. 

Incised ware, first appearance.at Cnossus, 
158 f. 

Initiation, scenes of, 313 f., 320 f. 

Inscriptions from Cyzicus, 74 f. 


J 


JUMPING-SCENES on vases, 272 


κ 


Kaunwn, imported pottery at, 183 

Kamres ware from Cnossus, 160 f; from 
Zakro, 248 ; link with Mycenaean, ‘254 ; 
surviving into Mycenaean period, 259 

Kefti, Cretan vases carried by, 201 

Krobylos, heads of Apollo with, 118 


L = 


‘LAMPADEDROMIA, 289 ἢ, 


Lampstand, bronze from Ephesus, 347 


Lansdowne House: 
Lysippus, 128 f. 

Leuke, island of, 45 f. 

Liber, Father, 322 

Libyo-Egyptian and Aegean civilisations 
synchronous, 163 

Ligurio, athlete of, 223, 228 

Liknites, Dionysus, 294, 322 

Liknon, 294 f. 

Liknophoria, 313 f. 

Loutrophoros, 150 

Louvre : Ὁ. f. vase, (Campana), with rustic 
cart, 136 ; vases with racing-scenes, 270 ; 
Hellenistic relief (Schr. Ixxx), with 
offering of firstfruits, 297 


Heracles after 


‘Lykos kylix (Hartwig, pl. Ixii. 1), 287 


Lyme Park (Cheshire), stelai at, 356 

Lyric metre, 71 

Lysimachean wall of Ephesus, 343 f, 

Lysippus, Agias of, 127 ; characteristics of his 
style, 127 f. 


M 


MARRIAGE-SCENES, 132 f.; liknon carried 
at, 315 

Mausoleum, head of Apollo from, 121 

Megara, birthplace of Theognis, 2 ; political 
history, 3 f. 

Megaron in Homeric house, 328 ἢ 

Meleager of the Vatican, Lysippic, 128 

Melisto and Epigenes, stele of, 357 

Melos (Phylakopi), vases of Cretan style 
from, 187; imported Mycenaean ware, 
199 ; houses, 327 f. 

Mercurago, wooden wheels from, 145 f. 

Messana, mule-car on coins of, 143 

Metal prototypes of pottery, 174, 248 ᾿ς, 251 

Metre, lyric, 71 

Miletus, recent excavations at, 352 

Minoan pottery of Cnossus, 157 f. 

Mule-car, racing, 143 

Munich: Hellenistic relief (Schr. Ixxx), 
298 ; r. f. amphora with cart, 142; kylix 
with jumping-scene, 272; with fancy 
foot-races, 283 ἢ, 

Musical form in Greek lyrics, 72 

Mycenae, Palace at, 327 f. ; vases of Cretan 
style from, 187, 194 

Mycenaean technique in Minoan pottery, 
165 f.; ware from Zakro, 251 f., 255 f. 

Mystic character of the winnowing-fan, 
313 f. 


N 


Napues : amphora with hoplitodromos, 286 
Naturalism in Cnossian pottery, 194 f. 
Neolithic pottery of Cnossus, 157 f. 
Newton (Lord), stelai belonging to, 356 
Nicaea, coin with Dionysus on liknon, 295 
Nomos (Persae) by Timotheus of Miletus, 
xlv, 
Nymph, head of, on Olbian coins, 34 f. 
Nymphaeum at Miletus, 354 


972 
O 


Oupa, Zeus of, 37 f. . 

Olbia, cults of, 24 f. ; coins of, 31 

Oldfield head of Apollo, 116 f. 

Olympia, arrangements for races, 262 f. 

Oschophoria, 291 

Overlapping of rhythms, 73 

Oxford (Ashmolean Mus.) : head of Apollo, 
116 f. 


P 


‘Patace’ style pottery from Cnossus, 183 f. 

Palaeography of Alexandrian Hexameter 
Fragments, 238 

Palaikastro, vases from, 251 f. 

Palermo, amphora with hoplitodromos, 286 

Panathenaic amphorae with racing-scenes, 
268 ἢ. 

Panderma (Cyzicus), inscriptions from, 78 f. 

Papyrus with Alexandrian Hexameter Frag- 
ments, 237 f. 

Paris (Bibliothéque), Euphronius kylix 
(Hartw. Pl. xvi.), 277 f.; Seleucid coins, 
95. (See also Louvre.) 

Parthenon, principle underlying curves and 
proportions of, xxxvil. 

Peiraeus, Conon’s Temple of Aphrodite at, 
24 

Pentathlon, method of deciding, 54 f. 

Pergamum, recent excavations at, 335 f. 

Persae of 'Timotheus of Miletus, xlvi. 

Phallophoria, 318, 320 

Phanagoria, Aphrodite Apatouros at, 25 f. 

Philosopher, head of, from Cerigotto, 233 

Phylakopi—See Melos 

Plataea, armed race at, 282 

Plato (Laws 629, 630), on birthplace of 
Theognis, 2 

Polychrome Minoan vases, 171 f. 

Polycleitus, statuette after, from Cerigotto, 
222 f.; influence on athletic art, 227; 
ἀστραγαλίζοντες of, 232 

Pontarches, Achilles, 45 

Poseidon at Olbia, 40; ᾿Ασφάλειος, 25; 
Swoiveos, 25, 40 

Pottery — See Cnossus, Palaikastro, Zakro. 

Pourtales head of Apollo, 118 

Praxiteles and the Cerigotto bronze, 154 ; 
style of, 218 ἢ, 

Priest of imperial cult, bust of, 349 

Proportion, natural basis of, xxxvii. 

Purification by the liknon, 314 f. 

Purse, Hermes holding, 229 f. 


R 


Race, the Greek foot-, 261 f. 

Restoration of bronze statues at Athens, 153 
Rhegium, mule-car on coins of, 143 
ΣΝ and Olbia, connection between, 


INDEX TO VOLUME XXII. 


Rhythms, overlapping of, 73 

Rippled surface in early Cnossian pottery, 
160, 181 

Rome; Museo Gregoriano: kylix with 
hoplitodromos, 286 ; with Hermes in 
liknon, 294 

— Museo delle Terme : urn with scene 
from mysteries, 313 f. ; stucco relief, 320 ἢ, 

— Villa Albani: relief (Schr. lix.), 134 


5 


ΞΆΒΑΙΑ, Illyrian for beer, 323 

Salamis (Cyprus), lead model of cart from, 
136 

Sarikeui (Zeleia), inscription from, 86 

Schnabelkannen from Zakro, 253, 257 

Scopas, head of Apollo from school of 
(Mausoleum), 123 ; Palatine Apollo, 124 ; 
works of his school, xxxviii, 126 f. ; and 
the Cerigotto bronze, :xxxviii, 154 ; his 
style, 217 f., 221 

Scythian type of head on coins of Olbia, 
50 f. 

Seleucid portraits, 92 f. 

Seleucus I., coin with name of Antiochus, 
110 

Seleucus, son of Antiochus I., 110 

Setvans, Sir Robert de, brass of, 312 

Sheep-bell vases from Cnossus, 170, 180 

Shovel used in winnowing, 302 

Sieve, cleansing of grain by, 308 

Silenus and Priapus on country cart, 134 

Spiral motive in Cnossian pottery, 179 

Stadiodromoi on vases, 268 f. 

Stadium-race, 261 f. 

Stelai at Lyme Park, Cheshire, 356 f. 


vk 


Tauric ARTEMIS, 29 

‘Tea-cup’ Minoan vases, 171 f. 

Tendril pattern on Zakro pottery, 249, 251 

Tenea, ‘ Apollo’ of, 228 

Theagenes of Megara, 3 f. 

Theatre of Ephesus, 340 f; of Miletus, 
352 f. 

Thebes, Cabeiric vases with rustic carts, 137, 
138 

Theognis and his poems, | f. 

Thraco-Macedonian coins with cart drawn 
by oxen, 144 

Tilt of cart, 140 f. 

Timotheus of Miletus, Persae of, xlvi. 

Tiryns, Palace at, 326 f. 

Tisamenus and the pentathlon, 55, 59 

Torch-race, 289 f. 

Travelling-cart, 139 f. 

Triptolemus, travelling car of, 144 

Sessa bronze statuette of hoplitodromos, 
270 ἢ, ; 


YapaJIk (Cyzicus), inscriptions, 84 ἢ, 
Yeni Keui (Ossie, imertptions, 75 f. 


Z 


ZaxKRO, pottery from, 248 f. 
Zeleia, inscription from, 86 
Zeus: at Cyzicus, 80; at Olbia, 36 ἢ ; 
sacrifice to (Cyzicene relief), 80; ’Ara- 


WEDDING-SCENES, Greek, 132 f. 
early types of, 132 f. 


White-filling in early Cnossian pottery, 159 βύριος, 38 ; Βασιλεύς, 37 ; ᾿Ελευθέριος, 37 ; 
Whorl, three-leaved, on Mycenaean pottery, Ὄλβιος, 37; Πολιάρχης, 37; Σωτήρ, 36 ; 
253, 256 . Ὕψιστος, 80. ; 


‘ 
F 


IL—GREEK INDEX. 


ἀγαθοί, oi, Theognis’ use of, 9 
*Syopaios, Hermes, 39 
᾿Αγροτέρα, Artemis, 28 
ἀγωνοθέτης, 77 

ἀθηρηλοιγός, 301 

ἅλματα, 265 

᾿Ανδιγόνη ? 86 

᾿Απάτουρος, ᾿Απατουριάς, Aphrodite, 25 f. 
ἀπήνη, 141, 143 ᾿ 
ἀποτριάζειν, 63, 64 

“Apewos, Dionysus, 41 

apnuos for ἀρήιος, 238 

ἁρμάμαξα, 141 

᾿Ασκληπιεῖα τὰ μεγάλα (Cyzicus), 77 
᾿Ασφάλειος, Poseidon, 25 

᾿Αταβύριος, Zeus, 38 


PadBides, 265 

Barnp, 272 

Βασιλεύς, Zeus, 37 

βάσσαις, Aphrodite ἁ ἐμ, 25 


γαμικοὶ λέβητες, 150 
γαμοστόλος, Aphrodite, 239 
γραμμαί, of race-course, 264 ἢ, 


δειλοί, oi, Theognis’ use of, 10 
δίκαια, Ta τῆς πολιτείας, 83 
δύλος rovnpds=dolus malus, 85 
δρομικά, τὰ, 57 

δρόμος ᾿Αχιλλέως, 45 


Ἐλευθέριος, Zeus, 37 
ἐπιλοιβή, 244 : 

ἔρωτες mrnvoi, 212 

ἔσται αὐτῷ πρὸς τὸν θεόν, 75 
Εὔπλοια, Aphrodite, 24 f. 
Εὐσέβεια, 80, 86 

ἔφεδρος, 56 f. 


ἡγεμόνες, Theognis’ use of, 8 f. 


θεοὶ of ἐν Σαμοθράκῃ, 44 
θρῖναξ, 303 f. 
θυρνάκι, 303 f. 


u for¢ in Alexandrian Papyrus, 238 
ἱιερός for ἱερός, 238 
ἵππιος δρόμος at Plataea, 232 


κακοί, οἱ, Theognis’ use of, 8 f. 
κάμπειοι, Taces, 261 

καμπτῆρες, 265, 268 

κκτ for xr, 239 

κλινίς, 132 

Kpareavés, Apollo, 87 ἢ, 


λασιωτίς, 244 

λαύρη, in Homeric house, 329 f. 
λικμητήριον, 304 

λίκνον, 294 f. 

Aoknia, 76 


μόκχθος, &e., 239 
μυροβόστρυχος, 242 


Navapyis, Aphrodite, 25 
νυμφεύτρια, 150 
νύσσα, 261, 268 


. 


ὁδὸς ἐς λαύρην, in Homeric house, 329 f. 
“OdBwos, Zeus, 37 

ὀλβίοτα, 244 

ὀπφθαλμός, 239 

ὀρσοθύρη, in Homeric house, 329 f. 
‘Oprnaia, 78 

Οὐρανία, Aphrodite, 26 ἢ, 


πάλαισμα, 55 

Πάνδημος, Aphrodite, 26 f. 
mavnyupiapyns, 7 

Παρθένος, Artemis, 28 ἴ, 
mapoxos, 132, 137, 150, 151 
πείρινθα, 135 

πιστός, in Christian inscriptions, 75 
Πλακήδιλλα, 86 

Πολιάρχης, Zeus, 37 
ποσκόψει-ε προσκόψει, 75 
πρεβ-- πρεσβύτερος, 84 
πτύον, 302 f. 


ῥῶγες μεγάροιο, in Homeric house, 332 f. 


a 
ot henguea Εν 


ὦ, earliest occurrence in inscriptions, 115 


Π1|.--ΒΟΟΚ5 NOTICED. 


Abbott, Macedonian Folklore, 364 

Adam, Republic of Plato, 207 

Anderson, Studia Pontica 362 ; Asia Minor, 
362 


Baur, Eileithyia, 213 
Bérard, Les Phéniciens et ?Odyssée, 363 
Bevan, House of Seleucus, 213 


Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey, Investigations 
at Assos, 360 

Collignon et Couve, Cutalogue des Vases 
Peints du Musée Nat. d’A thénes, 209 

Cook, Handbook to the G. and R. Antiquities 
in the B. M., 212 


de Ridder, Catalogue des Vases Peints de la 
Bibliothéque Nat., 210 

de Visser, Die .nicht menschengestaltigen 
Gotter, 214 

Dirpfeld, Z'roja und Ilion, 360 


Edgar, Greek Moulds, 361 


Furtwiingler und Reichhold, Griechische 
Vasenmalerei, 209 


Gardner, Ancient A thens, 208 

Goodspeed, Papyri from Cairo Museum, 
365 

Grenfell, Hunt, and Smyly, Tebtunis Papyri, 
206 


Haussoullier, Etudes sur Histoire de Milet 
et du Didymeion, 213 

Hill, Coins of Ancient Sicily, 212 

Miinzen, 


Imhoof-Blumer, Kleinasiatische 


if, 211 


Kirchner, Prosopographia A ttica, 212 
Kromayer, Antike Schlachtfelder, 363 


Macran, Harmonics of Aristorenus, 215 
Murray, Sculptures of the Parthenon, 213 


Niese, Geschichte der gr. u. maked, Staaten 
IIT., 363 
Noack, Homerische Paliiste, 365 


Oberhummer, Die Insel Cypern, 214 


Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyclopidie, Supp. 1., 
212 

Pollak, Klassisch-Antike 
beiten, 210 


Goldschmiedear- 


Reinach (S8.), Recueil de Tétes antiques, 361 
Reinach (T.), Z’Histoire par les Monnaies, 
211 


Skulpturen des Pergamon-Museums, 361 
Svoronos, Das Athener Nationalmuseum, 
361 


Waldstein and others, Argive Heraeum, 208 

Weicker, Der Seelenvogel, 215 

Weil, Littérature et Rhythmique grecques, 
364 

White and Allen, ᾿Αριστοφάνους Κωμῳδίαι, 
Facsimile of Cod. Ven., 207 

Wilamowitz-Modllendorf, Timotheos, die 
Perser, 206 

Wroth, Catalogue of the Coins of Parthia, 
211 


R. CLAY AND SONS, LTD., BREAD ST. HILL, E.C., AND BUNGAY, SUFFOLK. 


885 - 


ie 


εἰς ee ee ee eS ee 


“ 7 ayy ds dad ae. Ca 
Ἂς ἘΝ ἜΣΑΝ ΤΊΣ μῦν ῥοῦ od 
er ae 


Sethi he 


Ϊ ei 7 
PSO Pe asl, ee Baits ot eat 
i ed tos 6. a. 
saps Sy smapeaitts oe 
ΡΝ Ἢ Δ ylecoah Εν Hl rags aged 
ake 


es 
νη fA05 


yf wb oe 
με νὐδῇ Ν 
ist 
‘ 


porte ey 


Fah eee oF 
44. “εν 
ree 1% sd dete ΩΣ 


ΠΟ: ah: 


ψ νον. μὴ 
ae MPint 
rar ΔΕ cee 


153 ove ΤΩΣ 
2 
proves ents Arinnes ΡΥ 
feirte he οἱ dite δὶ eect 
‘at other’ ys 
bade oi ven 
70 ἩΜΩ͂Ν ited «εἰς 
Lisi ξιδνε Bw θέε EW at (v9 
ie ee ae aero t 
at As pie priors ΜΈΣ ΤῊΝ 
; Zit δ) 4 dees 
oe) is pe 


sth idem ἦν ᾿ " ie 
be τ: ἀν ΔῸΣ δὴ 
ἫΝ raat sa 4b he ome 
δ δ ετμ ae gly Ber beets OH 4 Shot δ. 
Fst > Matar att? “νἀ heed Thee 
ΔΉ Horeaty frp 
+ 


theses Sis 


Ly hana 

fe Pang 
Stn} 
Pats 


μὲ 
Deru tae 
5 Ms ἢ BDI PIA, +2 
ci Bi tree ἘΜ Πρ ats 
ἐπάν 2 a ole Boer. ἐν Pind 

bata eM FF 
bgt + dn ey nes teor eg 
ἣν 

tbs 


ΠΣ ΝΣ 


ai Ves os ian 
¥ γνῷ ot en at Ste 
ort Bs fea Ἂς Hants ἘΝ 
: ἘΝ or 
Ἢ hee ἜΑΡ cy ties eae ἮΝ ὙΠ 
as 
a 7679 8) Er: the: $n} see 
τὸ DOAAE hip 84 22.1 EAE SET » 
μαι " 
2» ἘΠ δ᾽ 
ΣΝ 


4 
abe δι pred: ar mle A 


bbe a 


ve 
γεν πεν ἜΡΩΣ 
i} 


ΣῊΝ 
τεὴν 


eh on σας 10) ὦ 
Set es y eur Raat Ὁ ae ΠΣ 
Palit ities nit oth rises 
ΡΝ ΠΣ ΜΟΙ spy enbe ere) = Ap rsd 
Sette p sept oens area VAM eis Dube 
mo? > Orie on eett ἡ δὴν δ τ αν διε ἌΡ eS DDL. 
Ἀφ δ ΠΑΣΩ͂Ν ver ἀλλ ἠδ bere Ay peat 4 
i δὴ ek sda πονοῦν phi te Sanpete We hee 
τι ΡΣ ἐνῆν εὐ έν» TERA ΜΗ ΣΝ 
argertk »ε PANONe nel rs Pate Ἄρτον; ἐξ 
Pants 


δὴ ἧς dedi 3 a ea % ἡ σατο τα 
Ἔσο, He SN RUA 
tw 


ΤΡ μές Ων, 
re. 

hk smerny rs ν 
2 ea Fate Hert 
paseo Bie bya 
siasraseite Eck 
a Sissi SHARON bone 


ἊΣ rie 


jae Ni 
ΩΣ ne yard 


ΣῊΝ 
it ast tie “᾿ ᾿ wh. τὰ rie 
Dest τε 


5 
patie ΜΙΝ Phat bendy th pet eet παῦλαν 
spree. 2 Renee ΟΣ ΜΙ 
ΚΝ reteen aie 43 δ ly ange ΤῊ Σ we ‘3 top 
Ἂν: ΜΌΝ pour Nisae, 
ree near 4 SSA ΣΉ τη 
rhe ieee ur } 
Batata alpen tat eae 


ΠΥ 
ph TARA Peitaoan tek Rite tt 
Wabes Law tay mite: ἡ δῇ basen 

sre ease iietes peare Resort 


re Aaa ἫΝ es 
ἌΡΑΣ 


3 i ΝΗ δος ye 
SP! Sees SPT Pe est rota ble 
LAM BEI POT ee eS A We 


Me res erage 
ἀν ες ων τς ἘΣ 
δον 


ue 
ETc Puth Shoes 
isa 
eR Νάξον Sep zfs + 


7 green 
1 aby Lee Ὧν Migs DRIVES oy yt 3 
Mattern es tre las crig! pee esd rare: 


Vebuideseebd 1 
ctf rts cy + 


phe! x ht? wd 


ae teh: ΘΝ 
“teh otra bal omesunzes wefan sAe 20% Εις εν eer 
Ὡς - eat zie Σὰ δὰ δ 
ΚΆΡΑ, NEO eres soins ts rN Ξ » δὲς 
var Sedge tak Wrst tee 22 > ate re 


igreircee tice Tha) 
a Sk Pp laws 


“7 
δὰ τὰν. DAR SETIASD, 


Rist 
μι: 


39425 ᾧ 


Ν 

ΚΕ ΟΟΝΝ amt AN 

ΠΑ ΘΝ 
λυ ν Δ τ 


he τ πῖλος 


ΦΥ͂ 
ea 
vy 


ah L Prats ΝΗ 
ESET ἐών ὍΝ τὰν ᾿ 
vy 


ἣν way “oa dee! be Giinsgar Pisiatanys toe 
ees Late toned oetestay ἘΝ ἀπ EEN sparen 
ὦ - . 


ay 
᾿ Β fs Share 
a mash oe tysmragerersl FPS aly 

Nee eet (aie iy at ΑΝ sy hats vere τ δ it 

ΑΜΑΝ : ΗΝ Sree bday dhe 
ΜᾺ 
᾿ Ὶ boas aye 
erate me igs ey ret 
nots 


ae Ἄν δὲ has 
re ora nat ge ΚΦ. dats 
STN Tse Dae aS 
aicoer eae oe Ninhiok av? x ‘ 
RCT SAVE ATP t Mi bad bre ἜΣ 
4» 


Ὁ 
Sass 
foie 

Wize SS 

es Listy 4. 


Apr sgh take ἫΝ 
SI are 


4 {Ὁ 
ΣΉΝ ἽΝ 
yank My Ake ΡΉΤΗ rn Ls ne 
pie “™ ΝΣ ad ΠΥ Μιὰν 
ΔΥΣΣΈΑ ΙΑ τξι Ant ἐν ΠΩΣ dit) 
v fo 


τ τὰ" 
‘RATT Edged 


Σ 
\ ἣν ᾿ το τὰ tat 
“7 ‘ 
PORE AER Are NGI 
on ese vt 
He OAD Fe AYA 
ye, eA ὃν 


lade 4 auhe sal 
atest 


ΙΝ eat tans! 
thts 


vate 
SOME ἍΜ, 
Peed ty 


Lae 
Resets ἊΣ 
relere< ets A tees § 4 
piesa ἫΝ uy 
RLS 


ῳ 
heed wartere: tar bebe 
RASA ΣΕ ΧΡ 

αν 


ΩΣ HU 9 


brew be hetitia, sae 
ant 


z Saleh 


᾿ 
ἈΉΡ Ast 
srity he ΩΝ 
ie ip VA 
τᾶν is 


ree. 


ieee ae 
δε 


mbna! yn 7 
Ht ike ἢ ie 


ἜΝ» 


mare 

με SANG: ‘oat 

ee bak δ pee 
Biel 


ΣΝ 
ἐλ eda ea. ΜῊ ἴα ἀντ ὺ 
Fine, ia) mf ΠΣ \hioacanals ΚΥΧΌΨΙ 
Lone Me iors ir 
We 7 Fechh.h Eo ied Mathe ἥν 
ἩΝΝ thal ee ee ὙΜΉΝ (het 
bey Sat Ὁ ΝΗ Ὁ Ὧν τ 


ts}. ifs 
ΗΝ ὑ 
tara 


ἘΠ 


HA 
meee Shes